1 Cf. Matt. xxvi. 59-62. 2 Cf. Matt. xxvii. 11-14. S MevyaroQuas umeorwpuntuas tovs xarTnyopous. 4 Cf. Matt. xxvii. 17. > Cf. Matt. xxvii. 18, Book 1. ] ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. 395 require me to compose will somewhat weaken that defence [of Christianity] which rests on facts, and that power of Jesus which is manifest to those who are not altogether de- void of perception. Notwithstanding, that we may not have the appearance of being reluctant to undertake the task which you have enjoined, we have endeavoured, to the best of our ability, to suggest, by way of answer to each of the statements advanced by Celsus, what seemed to us adapted to refute them, although his arguments have no power to shake the faith of any [true] believer. And forbid, indeed, that any one should be found who, after having been a par- taker in sucha love of God as was [displayed] in Christ Jesus, could be shaken in his purpose by the arguments of Celsus, or of any such as he. For Paul, when enumerating the innumerable causes which generally separate men from the love of Christ and from the love of God in Christ Jesus (to all of which, the love that was in himself rose superior), did not set down argument among the grounds of separation. For observe that he says, firstly: “Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or perse- cution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? (as it is written, For Thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.) Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him that loved us.”" And secondly, when laying down another series of causes which naturally tend to separate those who are not firmly grounded in their religion, he says: “ For I am per- suaded that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor princi- palities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.”?
4. Now, truly, it is proper that we should feel elated because afflictions, or those other causes enumerated by Paul, do not separate us [from Christ]; but not that Paul and the other apostles, and any other resembling them, [should enter- tain that feeling], because they were far exalted above such 396 ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. [Boon 1.
things when they said, “In all these things we are more than conquerors through Him that loved us,”* which is a stronger statement than that they are simply “conquerors.” But if it be proper for apostles to entertain a feeling of elation in not being separated from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord, that feeling will be entertained by them because neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor any of the things that follow, can separate them from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. And therefore I do not congratulate that believer in Christ whose faith can be shaken by Celsus—who no longer shares the common life of men, but has long since departed—or by any apparent plausibility of argument.’ For I do not know in what rank to place him who has need of arguments written in books in answer to the charges of Celsus against the Christians, in order to prevent him from being shaken in his faith, and con- firm him in it. But nevertheless, since in the multitude of those who are considered believers some such persons might be found as would have their faith shaken and over- thrown by the writings of Celsus, but who might be pre- served by a reply to them of such a nature as to refute his statements and to exhibit the truth, we have deemed it right to yield to your injunction, and to furnish an answer to the treatise which you sent us, but which I do not think that any one, although only a short way advanced in philosophy, will allow to be a “True Discourse,” as Celsus has entitled it.
5. Paul, indeed, observing that there are in Greek phi- losophy certain things not to be lightly esteemed, which are plausible in the eyes of the many, but which represent false- hood as truth, says with regard to such: “ Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.”* And seeing that there was a kind of greatness manifest in the words of the world’s wisdom, he said that the words of the philosophers were “ according to 1 Rom. viii. 37, vxepyixapey. 24 tives wibaveTyTOS Acyoy.
3 Col. it 8, Book 1. ] ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. 397 the rudiments of the world.’ No man of sense, however, would say that those of Celsus were “ according to the rudi- ments of the world.” Now those words, which contained some element of deceitfulness, the apostle named “ vain deceit,” probably by way of distinction from a deceit that was not “vain;” and the prophet Jeremiah observing this, ven- tured to say to God, “ O Lord, Thou hast deceived me, and I was deceived; Thou art stronger than I, and hast prevailed.”? But in the language of Cclsus there seems to me to be no deceitfulness at all, not even that which is “ vain;” such deceitfulness, viz., as is found in the language of those who have founded philosophical sects, and who have been endowed with no ordinary talent for such pursuits. And as no one would say that any ordinary error in geometrical demonstra- tions was intended to deceive, or would describe it for the sake of exercise in such matters;? so those opinions which are to be styled “vain deceit,” and the “tradition of men,” and “according to the rudiments of the world,” must have some resemblance to the views of those who have been the founders of philosophical sects, [if such titles are to be appropriately applied to them ].
6. After proceeding with this work as far as the place where Celsus introduces the Jew disputing with Jesus, I resolved to prefix this preface to the beginning [of the treatise], in order that the reader of our reply to Celsus might fall in with it first, and see that this book has been composed not for those who are thorough believers, but for such as are either wholly unacquainted with the Christian faith, or for those who, as the apostle terms them, are “ weak in the faith;” regarding whom he says, “ Him that is weak in the faith receive ye.”* And this preface must be my apology for beginning my answer to Celsus on one plan, and carry- ing it on on another. For my first intention was to indicate 1 Cf. Jer. XX. 7. > Kail wowep ov ro tTuxoy Tov Wevdoutvav ty yeausrpixois bzwezuceas wWevooypaDoumevoy Tig ay Atvyos, n xal aveypador yumyaciou evexty TOU 70 somuvuray. Cf. note of Ruseus in loc.
398 ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. [Book r.
his principal objections, and then briefly the answers that were returned to them, and subsequently to make a systematic treatise of the whole discourse.’ But afterwards, circumstances themselves suggested to me that I should be economical of my time, and that, satisfied with what I had already stated at the commencement, I should in the following part grapple closely, to the best of my ability, with the charges of Celsus. I have therefore to ask-indulgence for those portions which follow the preface towards the beginning of the book. And if you are not impressed by the powerful arguments which succeed, then, asking similar indulgence also with respect to them, I refer you, if you still desire an argumentative solu- tion of the objections of Celsus, to those men who are wiser than myself, and who are able by words and treatises to overthrow the charges which he brings against us. But better is the man who, although meeting with the work of Celsus, needs no answer to it at all, but who despises all its contents, since they are contemned, and with good reason, by every believer in Christ, through the Spirit that is in him.
CHAPTER I.
CHAPTER I.
The first point which Celsus brings forward, in his desire to throw discredit upon Christianity, is, that the Christians entered into secret associations with each other contrary to law, saying, that “of associations some are public, and that these are in accordance with the laws; others, again, secret, and maintained in violation of the laws.” And his wish is to bring into disrepute what are termed the “ love-feasts”? of the Christians, as if they had their origin in the common danger, and were more binding than any oaths. Since, then, he babbles about the public law, alleging that the associations of the Christians are in violation of it, we have to reply, that if a man were placed among Scythians, whose laws were un- holy,? and having no opportunity of escape, were compelled to live among them, such an one would with good reason, for the sake of the law of truth, which the Scythians would COL LTO O60 le THY xarovueyyy yarn. 3 adic uous.
Book 1. J ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. 399 regard as wickedness,’ enter into associations contrary to their laws, with those like-minded with himself; so, if truth is to decide, the laws of the heathens which relate to images, and an atheistical polytheism, are “ Scythian” laws, or more impious even than these, if there be any such. It is not irrational, then, to form associations in opposition to existing laws, if done for the sake of the truth. For as those persons would do well who should enter into a secret association in order to put to death a tyrant who had seized upon the liberties of a state, so Christians also, when tyrannized over by him who is called the devil, and by falsehood, form leagues contrary to the laws of the devil, against his power, and for the safety of those others whom they may succeed in per- suading to revolt from a government which is, as it were, “ Scythian,” and despotic.
CHAPTER II.
CHAPTER II.
Celsus next procecds to say, that the system of doctrine, viz. Judaism, upon which Christianity depends, was barbarous in its origin. And with an appearance of fairness, he does not reproach Christianity? because of its origin among barbarians, but gives the latter credit for their ability in discovering [such | doctrines. ‘To this, however, he adds the statement, that the Greeks are more skilful than any others in judging, estab- lishing, and reducing to practice the discoveries of barbarous nations. Now this is our answer to his allegations, and our defence of the truths contained in Christianity, that if any one were to come from the study of Grecian opinions and usages to the gospel, he would not only decide that its doc- trines were true, but would by practice establish their truth, and supply whatever seemed wanting, from a Grecian point of view, to their demonstration, and thus confirm the truth of Christianity. We have to say, moreover, that the gospel has a demonstration of its own, more divine than any estab- lished by Grecian dialectics. And this diviner method is called by the apostle the “ manifestation of the Spirit and of l recaveuley Ny RAE) fe;; e oe. a A 400 ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. [Book 1.
power:” of “the Spirit,” on account of the prophecies, which are sufficient to produce faith in any one who reads them, especially in those things which relate to Christ; and of ‘‘nower,” because of the signs and wonders which we must believe to have been performed, both on many other grounds, and on this, that traces of them are still preserved among those who regulate their lives by the precepts of the gospel.
CIUAPTER III.
CIUAPTER III.
After this, Celsus proceeding to speak of the Christians teaching and practising their favourite doctrines in secret, and saying that they do this to some purpose, seeing they escape the penalty of death which is imminent, he compares their dangers with those which were encountered by such men as Socrates for the sake of philosophy; and here he might have mentioned Pythagoras as well, and other philo- sophers. But our answer to this is, that in the case of Socrates the Athenians immediately afterwards repented; and no feeling of bitterness remained in their minds regard- ing him, as also happened in the history of Pythagoras. The followers of the latter, indeed, for a considerable time established their schools in that part of Italy called Magna Grecia; but in the case of the Christians, the Roman Senate, and the princes of the time, and the soldiery, and the people, and the relatives of those who had become converts to the faith, made war upon their doctrine, and would have pre- vented [its progress], overcoming it by a confederacy of so powerful a nature, had it not, by the help of God, escaped the danger, and risen above it, so as [finally] to defeat the whole world in its conspiracy against it.
CIIAPTER Iv.
Let us notice also how he thinks to cast discredit upon our system of morals,’ alleging that it is only common to us with other philosophers, and no venerable or new branch of in- 1 scy ybixcy tOevoy.
struction. In reply to which we have to say, that unless all men had naturally impressed upon their minds sound ideas of morality, the doctrine of the punishment of sinners would have been excluded by those who bring upon themselves the righteous judgments of God. It is not therefore matter of surprise that the same God should have sown in the hearts of all men those truths which He taught by the prophets and the Saviour, in order that at the divine judgment every man may be without excuse, having the “ requirements’ of the law written upon his heart,”—a truth obscurely alluded to by the Bible? in what the Greeks regard as a myth, where it represents God as having with His own finger written down the commandments, and given them to Moses, and which the wickedness of the worshippers of the calf made him break in pieces, as if the flood of wickedness, so to speak, had swept them away. But Moses having again hewn tables of stone, God wrote the commandments a second time, and gave them to him; the prophetic word preparing the soul, as it were, after the first transgression, for the writing of God a second time.
CrAPTER V. ~ CrAPTER V. ~ Treating of the regulations respecting idolatry as being peculiar to Christianity, Celsus establishes their correctness, saying that the Christians do not consider those to be gods that are made with hands, on the ground that it is not in conformity with right reason [to suppose] that images, fashioned by the most worthless and depraved of workmen, and in many instances also provided by wicked men, can be [regarded as] gods. In what follows, however, wishing to show that this is a common opinion, and one not first dis- covered by Christianity, he quotes a saying of Heraclitus to this effect: “That those who draw near to lifeless images, as if they were gods, act in a similar manner to those who would enter into conversation with houses.” Respecting this, then, we have to say, that ideas were implanted in the minds 1 ro BovAnuc Toy vouov. 3 ¢ Acyos.
ORIG. 20 402 ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. [Boor r.
of men like the principles of morality, from which not only Heraclitus, but any other Greek or barbarian, might by reflection have deduced the same conclusion; for he states that the Persians also were of the same opinion, quoting Herodotus as his authority. We also can add to these Zeno of Citium, who in his Polity says: “ And there will be no need to build temples, for nothing ought to be regarded as sacred, or of much value, or holy, which is the work of builders and of mean men.” It is evident, then, with respect to this opinion [as well as others], that there has been engraven upon the hearts of men by the finger of God a sense of the duty that is required.
CHAPTER VI.
CHAPTER VI.
After this, through the influence of some motive which is unknown to me, Celsus asserts that it is by the names of certain demons, and by the use of incantations, that the Christians appear to be possessed of [miraculous] power; hinting, I suppose, at the practices of those who expel evil spirits by incantations. And here he manifestly appears to malign the gospel. or it is not by incantations that Chris- tians seem to prevail [over evil spirits], but by the name of Jesus, accompanied by the announcement of the narratives which relate to Him; for the repetition of these has fre- quently been the means of driving demons out of men, especially when those who repeated them did so in a sound and genuinely believing spirit. Such power, indeed, does the name of Jesus possess over evil spirits, that there have been instances where it was effectual, when it was pronounced even by bad men, which Jesus Himself taught [would be the ease], when Ife said: “Many shall say to me in that day, In Thy name we have cast out devils, and done many won- derful works.”* Whether Celsus omitted this from inten- tional malignity, or from ignorance, I do not know. And he next proceeds to bring a charge against the Saviour Himself, alleging that it was by means of sorcery that He was able to 1Cf. Matt. vii. 22.
Book 1.] ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUY. £03 accomplish the wonders which He performed; and that fore- seeing that others would attain the same knowledge, and do the same things, making a boast of doing them by help of the power of God, He excludes such from His kingdom. And his accusation is, that if they are justly excluded, while He Himself is guilty of the same practices, He is a wicked man; but if He is not guilty of wickedness in doing such things, neither are they who do the same as He. But even if it be impossible to show by what power Jesus wrought these miracles, it is clear that Christians employ no spells or incantations, but the simple name of Jesus, and certain.
other words in which they repose faith, according to the Holy Scriptures.
CHAPTER VII.
Moreover, since he frequently calls the Christian doctrine a secret system [of belief], we must confute him on this point also, since almost the entire world is better acquainted with what Christians preach than with the favourite opinions of philosophers. For who is ignorant of the statement that Jesus was born of a virgin, and that Ie was crucified, and that His resurrection is an article of faith among many, and that a general judgment is announced to come, in which the wicked are to be punished according to their deserts, and the righteous to be duly rewarded? And yet the mystery of the resurrection, not being understood,’ is made a subject of ridicule among unbelievers. In these circumstances, to speak of the Christian doctrine as a secret system, is altogether absurd. But that there should be certain doctrines, not made known to the multitude, which are [revealed] after the exoteric ones have been taught, is not a peculiarity of Christianity alone, but also of philosophic systems, in which certain truths are exoteric and others esoteric. Some of the hearers of Pythagoras were content with his zpse diit; while others 1 The words, as they stand in the text of Lommatzsch, are, éArd xok “env vordiy co wepl 7%5 avactacsug pevotyocov. Rueus would read «y instead of wy». This emendation has been adopted in the translation.
AO! ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. [Book 1.
were taught in secret those doctrines which were not deemed fit to be communicated to profane and insufficiently prepared ears. Moreover, all the mysteries that are celebrated every- where throughout Greece and barbarous countries, although held in secret, have no discredit thrown upon them, so that it is in vain that he endeavours to calumniate the secret doctrines of Christianity, seeing he does not correctly under- stand its nature.
CHAPTER VIII.
It is with a certain eloquence,' indeed, that he appears to advocate the cause of those who bear witness to the truth of Christianity by their death, in the following words: “ And I do not maintain that if a man, who has adopted a system of good doctrine, is to incur danger from men on that account, he should either apostatize, or feign apostasy, or openly deny his opinions.” And he condemns those who, while holding the Christian views, either pretend that they do not, or deny them, saying that “he who holds a certain opinion ought not to feign recantation, or publicly disown it.” And here Celsus must be convicted of self-contradiction. For from other treatises of his it is ascertained that he was an Epicurean; but here, because he thought that he could assail Christianity with better effect by not professing the opinions of Epicurus, he pretends that there is a something better in man than the earthly part of his nature, which is akin to God, and says that “they in whom this element, viz. the soul, is in a healthy condition, are ever seeking after their kindred nature, meaning God, and are ever desiring to hear something about Him, and to call it to remembrance.” Observe now the in- sincerity of his character! Having said a little before, that “the man who had embraced a system of good doctrine ought not, even if exposed to danger on that account from men, to disavow it, or pretend that he had done so, nor yet openly disown it,” he now involves himself in all manner of contra- dictions. For he knew that if he acknowledged himself an l desvernro;.
Book 1. | ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. 405 Epicurean, he would not obtain any credit when accusing those who, in any degree, introduce the doctrine of Pro- vidence, and who place a God over the world. And we have heard that there were two individuals of the name of Celsus, both of whom were Epicureans; the earlier of the two having lived in the time of Nero, but this one in that of Adrian, and later.
CHAPTER IX.
Ile next proceeds to recommend, that in adopting opinions we should follow reason and a rational guide,’ since he who ussents to opinions without following this course is very liable to be deceived. And he compares inconsiderate believers to Metragyrte, and soothsayers, and Mithr, and Sabbadians, und to anything else that one may fall in with, and to the phantoms of Hecate, or any other demon or demons. For us amongst such persons are frequently to be found wicked men, who, taking advantage of the ignorance of those who. ure easily deceived, lead them away whither they will, so also, he says, is the case among Christians. And he asserts that certain persons who do not wish either to give or receive a reason for their belief, keep repeating, “Do not examine, but believe!” and, “ Your faith will save you!” And he alleges that such also say, “ ‘The wisdom of this life is bad, but that foolishness is a good thing!” To which we have to answer, that if it were possible for all to leave the business of life, and devote themselves to philosophy, no other method ought to be adopted by any one, but this alone. For in the Christian system also it ivill be found that there is, not to speak at all arrogantly, at least as much of investigation into articles of belief, and of explanation of dark sayings, occur- ring in the prophetical writings, and of the parables in the Gospels, and of countless other things, which either were narrated or enacted with a symbolical signification,” [as is the case with other systems]. But since the course alluded td ~ om ~ l rGyw nal Aoyixe CONnYO.
aes ox), 2 GU BoAINMS YEYEYL Uc sav, HB vEvoeodsrnuivoy, 406 ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. [Book r.
to is impossible, partly on account of the necessities of life, partly on account of the weakness of men, as only a very few individuals devote themselves earnestly to study,’ what better method could be devised with a view of assisting the multitude, than that which was delivered by Jesus to the heathen? And Ict us inquire, with respect to the great multitude of believers, who have washed away the mire of wickedness in which they formerly wallowed, whether it were better for them to believe without a reason, and [so] to have become reformed and improved in their habits, through: the belief that men are chastised for sins, and honoured for good works; or not to have allowed themselves to be con- verted on the strength of mere faith, but [to have waited] until they could give themselves to a thorough examination of the [necessary] reasons. For it is manifest that, [on such a plan], all men, with very few exceptions, would not obtain this [amelioration of conduct] which they have obtained through a simple faith, but would continue to remain in the practice of a wicked life. Now, whatever other evidence can be furnished of the fact, that it was not without divine intervention that the philanthropic scheme of Christianity was introduced among men, this also must be added. For a pious man will not believe that even a physician of the body, who restores the sick to better health, could take up his abode in any city or country without divine permission, since ro good happens to men without the help of God. And if he who has cured the bodies of many, or restored them to better health, does not effect his cures without the help of God, how much more He who has healed the souls of many, and has turned them [to virtue], and improved their nature, and attached them to God who is over all things, and taught them to refer every action to His good pleasure, and to shun all that is displeasing to Him, even to the least of their words or deeds, or even of the thoughts of their hearts?