Letter Against Celsus - Origen - Book IV
Advanced Information
Translated by the Rev. Frederick Crombie, D.D.
Text edited by Rev. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson and
first published by T&T Clark in Edinburgh in 1867. Additional
introductionary material and notes provided for the American
edition by A. Cleveland Coxe, 1886.
Book IV
Chapter I.
Having, in the three preceding books, fully stated what occurred to us by
way of answer to the treatise of Celsus, we now, reverend Ambrosius, with
prayer to God through Christ, offer this fourth book as a reply to what
follows. And we pray that words may be given us, as it is written in the
book of Jeremiah that the Lord said to the prophet: "Behold, I have put My
words in thy mouth as fire. See, I have set thee this day over the nations,
and over the kingdoms, to root out and to pull down, and to destroy, and to
throw down, and to build and to plant." [3432] For we need words now which
will root out of every wounded soul the reproaches uttered against the truth
by this treatise of Celsus, or which proceed from opinions like his. And we
need also thoughts which will pull down all edifices based on false
opinions, and especially the edifice raised by Celsus in his work which
resembles the building of those who said "Come, let us build us a city, and
a tower whose top shall reach to heaven." [3433] Yea, we even require a
wisdom which will throw down all high things that rise against the knowledge
of God, [3434] and especially that height of arrogance which Celsus displays
against us. And in the next place, as we must not stop with rooting out and
pulling down the hindrances which have just been mentioned, but must, in
room of what has been rooted out, plant the plants of "God's husbandry; "
[3435] mad in place of what has been pulled down, rear up the building of
God, and the temple of His glory,'we must for that reason pray also to the
Lord, who bestowed the gifts named in the book of Jeremiah, that He may
grant even to us words adapted both for building up the (temple) of Christ,
and for planting the spiritual law, and the prophetic words referring to the
same. [3436] And above all is it necessary to show, as against the
assertions of Celsus which follow those he has already made, that the
prophecies regarding Christ are true predictions. For, arraying himself at
the same time against both parties'against the Jews on the one hand, who
deny that the advent of Christ has taken place, but who expect it as future,
and against Christians on the other, who acknowledge that Jesus is the
Christ spoken of in prophecy'he makes the following statement:'
Chapter II.
"But that certain Christians and (all) Jews should maintain, the former that
there has already descended, the latter that there will descend, upon the
earth a certain God, or Son of a God, who will make the inhabitants of the
earth righteous, [3437] is a most shameless assertion, and one the
refutation of which does not need many words." Now here he appears to
pronounce correctly regarding not "certain" of the Jews, but all of them,
that they imagine that there is a certain (God) who will descend upon the
earth; and with regard to Christians, that certain of them say that He has
already come down. For he means those who prove from the Jewish Scriptures
that the advent of Christ has already taken place, and he seems to know that
there are certain heretical sects which deny that Christ Jesus was predicted
by the prophets. In the preceding pages, however, we have already discussed,
to the best of our ability, the question of Christ having been the subject
of prophecy, and therefore, to avoid tautology, we do not repeat much that
might be advanced upon this head. Observe, now, that if he had wished with a
kind of apparent force [3438] to subvert faith in the prophetic writings,
either with regard to the future or past advent of Christ, he ought to have
set forth the prophecies themselves which we Christians and Jews quote in
our discussions with each other. For in this way he would have appeared to
turn aside those who are carried away by the plausible character [3439] of
the prophetic statements, as he regards it, from assenting to their truth,
and from believing, on account of these prophecies, that Jesus is the
Christ; whereas now, being unable to answer the prophecies relating to
Christ, or else not knowing at all what are the prophecies relating to Him,
he brings forward no prophetic declaration, although there are countless
numbers which refer to Christ; but he thinks that he prefers an accusation
against the prophetic Scriptures, while he does not even state what he
himself would call their "plausible character!" He is not, however, aware
that it is not at all the Jews who say that Christ will descend as a God, or
the Son of a God, as we have shown in the foregoing pages. And when he
asserts that "he is said by us to have already come, but by the Jews that
his advent as Messiah [3440] is still future," he appears by the very charge
to censure our statement as one that is most shameless, and which needs no
lengthened refutation.
Chapter III.
And he continues: "What is the meaning of such a descent upon the part of
God? "not observing that, according to our teaching, the meaning of the
descent is pre-eminently to convert what are called in the Gospel the lost
"sheep of the house of Israel; "and secondly, to take away from them, on
account of their disobedience, what is called the "kingdom of God," and to
give to other husbandmen than the ancient Jews, viz. to the Christians, who
will render to God the fruits of His kingdom in due season (each action
being a "fruit of the kingdom"). [3441] We shall therefore, out of a
greater number, select a few remarks by way of answer to the question of
Celsus, when he says, "What is the meaning of such a descent upon the part
of God? "And Celsus here returns to himself an answer which would have been
given neither by Jews nor by us, when he asks, "Was it in order to learn
what goes on amongst men? "For not one of us asserts that it was in order to
learn what goes on amongst men that Christ entered into this life.
Immediately after, however, as if some would reply that it was "in order to
learn what goes on among men," he makes this objection to his own statement:
"Does he not know all things? "Then, as if we were to answer that He does
know all things, he raises a new question, saying, "Then he does know, but
does not make (men) better, nor is it possible for him by means of his
divine power to make (men) better." Now all this on his part is silly
talk; [3442] for God, by means of His word, which is continually passing
from generation to generation into holy souls, and constituting them friends
of God and prophets, does improve those who listen to His words; and by the
coming of Christ He improves, through the doctrine of Christianity, not
those who are unwilling, but those who have chosen the better life, and that
which is pleasing to God. I do not know, moreover, what kind of improvement
Celsus wished to take place when he raised the objection, asking, "Is it
then not possible for him, by means of his divine power, to make (men)
better, unless he send some one for that special purpose? " [3443] Would
he then have the improvement to take place by God's filling the minds of men
with new ideas, removing at once the (inherent) wickedness, and implanting
virtue (in its stead)? [3444] Another person now would inquire whether
this was not inconsistent or impossible in the very nature of things; we,
however, would say, "Grant it to be so, and let it be possible." Where,
then, is our free will? [3445] and what credit is there in assenting to
the truth? or how is the rejection of what is false praiseworthy? But even
if it were once granted that such a course was not only possible, but could
be accomplished with propriety (by God), why would not one rather inquire
(asking a question like that of Celsus) why it was not possible for God, by
means of His divine power, to create men who needed no improvement, but who
were of themselves virtuous and perfect, evil being altogether non-existent?
These questions may perplex ignorant and foolish individuals, but not him
who sees into the nature of things; for if you take away the spontaneity of
virtue, you destroy its essence. But it would need an entire treatise to
discuss these matters; and on this subject the Greeks have expressed
themselves at great length in their works on providence. They truly would
not say what Celsus has expressed in words, that "God knows (all things)
indeed, but does not make (men) better, nor is able to do so by His divine
power." We ourselves have spoken in many parts of our writings on these
points to the best of our ability, and the Holy Scriptures have established
the same to those who are able to understand them.
Chapter IV.
The argument which Celsus employs against us and the Jews will be turned
against himself thus: My good sir, does the God who is over all things know
what takes place among men, or does He not know? Now if you admit the
existence of a God and of providence, as your treatise indicates, He must of
necessity know. And if He does know, why does He not make (men) better? Is
it obligatory, then, on us to defend God's procedure in not making men
better, although He knows their state, but not equally binding on you, who
do not distinctly show by your treatise that you are an Epicurean, but
pretend to recognise a providence, to explain why God, although knowing all
that takes place among men, does not make them better, nor by divine power
liberate all men from evil? We are not ashamed, however, to say that God is
constantly sending (instructors) in order to make men better; for there are
to be found amongst men reasons [3446] given by God which exhort them to
enter on a better life. But there are many diversities amongst those who
serve God, and they are few in number who are perfect and pure ambassadors
of the truth, and who produce a complete reformation, as did Moses and the
prophets. But above all these, great was the reformation effected by Jesus,
who desired to heal not only those who lived in one corner of the world, but
as far as in Him lay, men in every country, for He came as the Saviour of
all men.
Chapter V.
The illustrious [3447] Celsus, taking occasion I know not from what, next
raises an additional objection against us, as if we asserted that "God
Himself will come down to men." He imagines also that it follows from this,
that "He has left His own abode; "for he does not know the power of God, and
that "the Spirit of the Lord filleth the world, and that which upholdeth all
things hath knowledge of the voice." [3448] Nor is he able to understand
the words, "Do I not fill heaven and earth? saith the Lord." [3449] Nor
does he see that, according to the doctrine of Christianity, we all "in Him
live, and move, and have our being," [3450] as Paul also taught in his
address to the Athenians; and therefore, although the God of the universe
should through His own power descend with Jesus into the life of men, and
although the Word which was in the beginning with God, which is also God
Himself, should come to us, He does not give His place or vacate His own
seat, so that one place should be empty of Him, and another which did not
formerly contain Him be filled. But the power and divinity of God comes
through him whom God chooses, and resides in him in whom it finds a place,
not changing its situation, nor leaving its own place empty and filling
another: for, in speaking of His quitting one place and occupying another,
we do not mean such expressions to be taken topically; but we say that the
soul of the bad man, and of him who is overwhelmed in wickedness, is
abandoned by God, while we mean that the soul of him who wishes to live
virtuously, or of him who is making progress (in a virtuous life), or who is
already living conform-ably thereto, is filled with or becomes a partaker of
the Divine Spirit. It is not necessary, then, for the descent of Christ, or
for the coming of God to men, that He should abandon a greater seat, and
that things on earth should be changed, as Celsus imagines when he says, "If
you were to change a single one, even the least, of things on earth, all
things would be overturned and disappear." And if we must speak of a change
in any one by the appearing of the power of God, and by the entrance of the
word among men, we shall not be reluctant to speak of changing from a wicked
to a virtuous, from a dissolute to a temperate, and from a superstitious to
a religious life, the person who has allowed the word of God to find
entrance into his soul.
Chapter VI
But if you will have us to meet the most ridiculous among the charges of
Celsus, listen to him when he says: "Now God, being unknown amongst men, and
deeming himself on that account to have less than his due, [3451] would
desire to make himself known, and to make trial both of those who believe
upon him and of those who do not, like those of mankind who have recently
come into the possession of riches, and who make a display of their wealth;
and thus they testify to an excessive but very mortal ambition on the part
of God." [3452] We answer, then, that God, not being known by wicked men,
would desire to make Himself known, not because He thinks that He meets with
less than His due, but because the knowledge of Him will free the possessor
from unhappiness. Nay, not even with the desire to try those who do or who
do not believe upon Him, does He, by His unspeakable and divine power,
Himself take up His abode in certain individuals, or send His Christ; but He
does this in order to liberate from all their wretchedness those who do
believe upon Him, and who accept His divinity, and that those who do not
believe may no longer have this as a ground of excuse, viz., that their
unbelief is the consequence of their not having heard the word of
instruction. What argument, then, proves that it follows from our views that
God, according to our representations, is "like those of mankind who have
recently come into the possession of riches, and who make a display of their
wealth? "For God makes no display towards us, from a desire that we should
understand and consider His pre-eminence; but desiring that the blessedness
which results from His being known by us should be implanted in our souls,
He brings it to pass through Christ, and His ever-indwelling word, that we
come to an intimate fellowship [3453] with Him. No mortal ambition, then,
does the Christian doctrine testify as existing on the part of God.
Chapter VII.
I do not know how it is, that after the foolish remarks which he has made
upon the subject which we have just been discussing, he should add the
following, that "God does not desire to make himself known for his own sake,
but because he wishes to bestow upon us the knowledge of himself for the
sake of our salvation, in order that those who accept it may become virtuous
and be saved, while those who do not accept may be shown to be wicked and be
punished." And yet, after making such a statement, he raises a new
objection, saying: "After so long a period of time, [3454] then, did God
now bethink himself of making men live righteous lives, [3455] but neglect
to do so before? "To which we answer, that there never was a time when God
did not wish to make men live righteous lives; but He continually evinced
His care for the improvement of the rational animal, [3456] by affording
him occasions for the exercise of virtue. For in every generation the wisdom
of God, passing into those souls which it ascertains to be holy, converts
them into friends and prophets of God. And there may be found in the sacred
book (the names of) those who in each generation were holy, and were
recipients of the Divine Spirit, and who strove to convert their
contemporaries so far as in their power.
Chapter VIII.
And it is not matter of surprise that in certain generations there have
existed prophets who, in the reception of divine influence, [3457]
surpassed, by means of their stronger and more powerful (religious) life,
other prophets who were their contemporaries, and others also who lived
before and after them. And so it is not at all wonderful that there should
also have been a time when something of surpassing excellence [3458] took
up its abode among the human race, and which was distinguished above all
that preceded or even that followed. But there is an element of profound
mystery in the account of these things, and one which is incapable of being
received by the popular understanding. And in order that these difficulties
should be made to disappear, and that the objections raised against the
advent of Christ should be answered'viz., that, "after so long a period of
time, then, did God now bethink himself of making men live righteous lives,
but neglect to do so before? "'it is necessary to touch upon the narrative
of the divisions (of the nations), and to make it evident why it was, that
"when the Most High divided the nations, when He separated the sons of Adam,
He set the bounds of the nations according to the number of the angels of
God, and the portion of the Lord was His people Jacob, Israel the cord of
His inheritance; " [3459] and it will be necessary to state the reason why
the birth of each man took place within each particular boundary, under him
who obtained the boundary by lot, and how it rightly happened that "the
portion of the Lord was His people Jacob, and Israel the cord of His
inheritance," and why formerly the portion of the Lord was His people Jacob,
and Israel the cord of His inheritance. But with respect to those who come
after, it is said to the Saviour by the Father, "Ask of Me, and I will give
Thee the heathen for Thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth
for Thy possession." [3460] For there are certain connected and related
reasons, bearing upon the different treatment of human souls, which are
difficult to state and to investigate. [3461]
Chapter IX.
There came, then, although Celsus may not wish to admit it, after the
numerous prophets who were the reformers of that well-known Israel, the
Christ, the Reformer of the whole world, who did not need to employ against
men whips, and chains, and tortures, as was the case under the former
economy. For when the sower went forth to sow, the doctrine sufficed to sow
the word everywhere. But if there is a time coming which will necessarily
circumscribe the duration of the world, by reason of its having had a
beginning, and if there is to be an end to the world, and after the end a
just judgment of all things, it will be incumbent on him who treats the
declarations of the Gospels philosophically, to establish these doctrines by
arguments of all kinds, not only derived directly from the sacred
Scriptures, but also by inferences deducible from them; while the more
numerous and simpler class of believers, and those who are unable to
comprehend the many varied aspects of the divine wisdom, must entrust
themselves to God, and to the Saviour of our race, and be contented with His
"ipse dixit," [3462] instead of this or any other demonstration whatever.
Chapter X.
In the next place, Celsus, as is his custom having neither proved nor
established anything, proceeds to say, as if we talked of God in a manner
that was neither holy nor pious, that "it is perfectly manifest that they
babble about God in a way that is neither holy nor reverential; "and he
imagines that we do these things to excite the astonishment of the ignorant,
and that we do not speak the truth regarding the necessity of punishments
for those who have sinned. And accordingly he likens us to those who "in the
Bacchic mysteries introduce phantoms and objects of terror." With respect to
the mysteries of Bacchus, whether there is any trustworthy [3463] account
of them, or none that is such, let the Greeks tell, and let Celsus and his
boon-companions [3464] listen. But we defend our own procedure, When we
say that our object is to reform the human race, either by the threats of
punishments which we are persuaded are necessary for the whole world,
[3465] and which perhaps are not without use [3466] to those who are to
endure them; or by the promises made to those who have lived virtuous lives,
and in which are contained the statements regarding the blessed termination
which is to be found in the kingdom of God, reserved for those who are
worthy of becoming His subjects.
Chapter XI.
After this, being desirous to show that it is nothing either wonderful or
new which we state regarding floods or conflagrations, but that, from
misunderstanding the accounts of these things which are current among Greeks
or barbarous nations, we have accorded our belief to our own Scriptures when
treating of them, he writes as follows: "The belief has spread among them,
from a misunderstanding of the accounts of these occurrences, that after
lengthened cycles of time, and the returns and conjunctions of planets,
conflagrations and floods are wont to happen, and because after the last
flood, which took place in the time of Deucalion, the lapse of time,
agreeably to the vicissitude of all things, requires a conflagration and
this made them give utterance to the erroneous opinion that God will
descend, bringing fire like a torturer." Now in answer to this we say, that
I do not understand how Celsus, who has read a great deal, and who shows
that he has perused many histories, had not his attention arrested [3467]
by the antiquity of Moses, who is related by certain Greek historians to
have lived about the time of Inachus the son of Phoroneus, and is
acknowledged by the Egyptians to be a man of great antiquity, as well as by
those who have studied the history of the Phoenicians. And any one who likes
may peruse the two books of Flavius Josephus on the antiquities of the Jews,
in order that he may see in what way Moses was more ancient than those who
asserted that floods and conflagrations take place in the world after long
intervals of time; which statement Celsus alleges the Jews and Christians to
have misunderstood, and, not comprehending what was said about a
conflagration, to have declared that "God will descend, bringing fire like a
torturer." [3468]
Chapter XII.
Whether, then, there are cycles of time, and floods, or conflagrations which
occur periodically or not, and whether the Scripture is aware of this, not
only in many passages, but especially where Solomon [3469] says, "What is
the thing which hath been? Even that which shall be. And what is the thing
which hath been done? Even that which shall be done," [3470] etc., etc.,
belongs not to the present occasion to discuss. For it is sufficient only to
observe, that Moses and certain of the prophets, being men of very great
antiquity, did not receive from others the statements relating to the
(future) conflagration of the world; but, on the contrary (if we must attend
to the matter of time [3471] ), others rather misunderstanding them, and
not inquiring accurately into their statements, invented the fiction of the
same events recurring at certain intervals, and differing neither in their
essential nor accidental qualities. [3472] But we do not refer either the
deluge or the conflagration to cycles and planetary periods; but the cause
of them we declare to be the extensive prevalence of wickedness, [3473]
and its (consequent) removal by a deluge or a conflagration. And if the
voices of the prophets say that God "comes down," who has said, "Do I not
fill heaven and earth? saith the Lord," [3474] the term is used in a
figurative sense. For God "comes down" from His own height and greatness
when He arranges the affairs of men, and especially those of the wicked. And
as custom leads men to say that teachers "condescend" [3475] to children,
and wise men to those youths who have just be-taken themselves to
philosophy, not by "descending" in a bodily manner; so, if God is said
anywhere in the holy Scriptures to "come down," it is understood as spoken
in conformity with the usage which so employs the word, and, in like manner
also with the expression "go up." [3476]
Chapter XIII.
But as it is in mockery that Celsus says we speak of "God coming down like a
torturer bearing fire," and thus compels us unseasonably to investigate
words of deeper meaning, we shall make a few remarks, sufficient to enable
our hearers to form an idea [3477] of the defence which disposes of the
ridicule of Celsus against us, and then we shall turn to what follows. The
divine word says that our God is "a consuming fire," [3478] and that "He
draws rivers of fire before Him; " [3479] nay, that He even entereth in as
"a refiner's fire, and as a fuller's herb," [3480] to purify His own
people. But when He is said to be a "consuming fire," we inquire what are
the things which are appropriate to be consumed by God. And we assert that
they are wickedness, and the works which result from it, and which, being
figuratively called "wood, hay, stubble," [3481] God consumes as a fire.
The wicked man, accordingly, is said to build up on the previously-laid
foundation of reason, "wood, and hay, and stubble." If, then, any one can
show that these words were differently understood by the writer, and can
prove that the wicked man literally [3482] builds up "wood, or hay, or
stubble," it is evident that the fire must be understood to be material, and
an object of sense. But if, on the contrary, the works of the wicked man are
spoken of figuratively under the names of "wood, or hay, or stubble," why
does it not at once occur (to inquire) in what sense the word "fire" is to
be taken, so that "wood" of such a kind should be consumed? for (the
Scripture) says: "The fire will try each man's work of what sort it is. If
any man's work abide. which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a
reward. If any man's work be burned, he shall suffer loss." [3483] But
what work can be spoken of in these words as being "burned," save all that
results from wickedness? Therefore our God is a "consuming fire" in the
sense in which we have taken the word; and thus He enters in as a
"refiner's fire," to refine the rational nature, which has been filled with
the lead of wickedness, and to free it from the other impure materials,
which adulterate the natural gold or silver, so to speak, of the soul.
[3484] And, in like manner, "rivers of fire" are said to be before God, who
will thoroughly cleanse away the evil which is intermingled throughout the
whole soul. [3485] But these remarks are sufficient in answer to the
assertion, "that thus they were made to give expression to the erroneous
opinion that God will come down bearing fire like a torturer."
Chapter XIV.
But let us look at what Celsus next with great ostentation announces in the
following fashion: "And again," he says, "let us resume the subject from the
beginning, with a larger array of proofs. And I make no new statement, but
say what has been long settled. God is good, and beautiful, and blessed, and
that in the best and most beautiful degree. [3486] But if he come down
among men, he must undergo a change, and a change from good to evil, from
virtue to vice, from happiness to misery, and from best to worst. Who, then,
would make choice of such a change? It is the nature of a mortal, indeed, to
undergo change and remoulding, but of an immortal to remain the same and
unaltered. God, then, could not admit of such a change." Now it appears to
me that the fitting answer has been returned to these objections, when I
have related what is called in Scripture the "condescension" [3487] of God
to human affairs; for which purpose He did not need to undergo a
transformation, as Celsus thinks we assert, nor a change from good to evil,
nor from virtue to vice, nor from happiness to misery, nor from best to
worst. For, continuing unchangeable in His essence, He condescends to human
affairs by the economy of His providence. [3488] We show, accordingly,
that the holy Scriptures represent God as unchangeable, both by such words
as "Thou art the same," [3489] and" I change not; " [3490] whereas the
gods of Epicurus, being composed of atoms, and, so far as their structure is
concerned, capable of dissolution, endeavour to throw off the atoms which
contain the elements of destruction. Nay, even the god of the Stoics, as
being corporeal, at one time has his whole essence composed of the guiding
principle [3491] when the conflagration (of the world) takes place; and at
another, when a re-arrangement of things occurs, he again becomes partly
material. [3492] For even the Stoics were unable distinctly to comprehend
the natural idea of God, as of a being altogether incorruptible and simple,
and uncompounded and indivisible.
Chapter XV.
And with respect to His having descended among men, He was "previously in
the form of God; " [3493] and through benevolence, divested Himself (of
His glory), that He might be capable of being received by men. But He did
not, I imagine, undergo any change from "good to evil," for "He did no sin;
" [3494] nor from "virtue to vice," for "He knew no sin." [3495] Nor did
He pass from "happiness to misery," but He humbled Himself, and nevertheless
was blessed, even when His humiliation was undergone in order to benefit our
race. Nor was there any change in Him from "best to worst," for how can
goodness and benevolence be of "the worst? "Is it befitting to say of the
physician, who looks on dreadful sights and handles unsightly objects in
order to cure the sufferers, that he passes from "good to evil," or from
"virtue to vice," or from "happiness to misery? "And yet the physician, in
looking on dreadful sights and handling unsightly objects, does not wholly
escape the possibility of being involved in the same fate. But He who heals
the wounds of our souls, through the word of God that is in Him, is Himself
incapable of admitting any wickedness. But if the immortal God'the Word
[3496] 'by assuming a mortal body and a human soul, appears to Celsus to
undergo a change and transformation, let him learn that the Word, still
remaining essentially the Word, suffers none of those things which are
suffered by the body or the soul; but, condescending occasionally to (the
weakness of) him who is unable to look upon the splendours and brilliancy of
Deity, He becomes as it were flesh, speaking with a literal voice, until he
who has received Him in such a form is able, through being elevated in some
slight degree by the teaching of the Word, to gaze upon what is, so to
speak, His real and pre-eminent appearance. [3497]
Chapter XVI.
For there are different appearances, as it were, of the Word, according as
He shows Himself to each one of those who come to His doctrine; and this in
a manner corresponding to the condition of him who is just becoming a
disciple, or of him who has made a little progress, or of him who has
advanced further, or of him who has already nearly attained to virtue, or
who has even already attained it. And hence it is not the case, as Celsus
and those like him would have it, that our God was transformed, and
ascending the lofty mountain, showed that His real appearance was something
different, and far more excellent than what those who remained below, and
were unable to follow Him on high, beheld. For those below did not possess
eyes capable of seeing the transformation of the Word into His glorious and
more divine condition. But with difficulty were they able to receive Him as
He was; so that it might be said of Him by those who were unable to behold
His more excellent nature: "We saw Him, and He had no form nor comeliness;
but His form was mean, [3498] and inferior to that of the sons of men."
[3499] And let these remarks be an answer to the suppositions of Celsus, who
does not understand the changes or transformations of Jesus, as related in
the histories, nor His mortal and immortal nature. [3500]
Chapter XVII.
But will not those narratives, especially when they are understood in their
proper sense, appear far more worthy of respect than the story that Dionysus
was deceived by the Titans, and expelled from the throne of Jupiter, and
torn in pieces by them, and his remains being afterwards put together again,
he returned as it were once more to life, and ascended to heaven? Or are the
Greeks at liberty to refer such stories to the doctrine of the soul, and to
interpret them figuratively, while the door of a consistent explanation, and
one everywhere in accord and harmony with the writings of the Divine Spirit,
who had His abode in pure souls, is closed against us? Celsus, then, is
altogether ignorant of the purpose of our writings, and it is therefore upon
his own acceptation of them that he casts discredit, and not upon their real
meaning; whereas, if he had reflected on what is appropriate [3501] to a
soul which is to enjoy an everlasting life, and on the opinion which we are
to form of its essence and principles, he would not so have ridiculed the
entrance of the immortal into a mortal body, which took place not according
to the metempsychosis of Plato, but agreeably to another and higher view of
things. And he would have observed one "descent," distinguished by its great
benevolence, undertaken to convert (as the Scripture mystically terms them)
the "lost sheep of the house of Israel," which had strayed down from the
mountains, and to which the Shepherd is said in certain parables to have
gone down, leaving on the mountains those "which had not strayed."
Chapter XVIII.
But Celsus, lingering over matters which he does not understand, leads us to
be guilty of tautology, as we do not wish even in appearance to leave any
one of his objections unexamined. He proceeds, accordingly, as follows: "God
either really changes himself, as these assert, into a mortal body, and the
impossibility of that has been already declared; Or else he does not undergo
a change, but only causes the beholders to imagine so, and thus deceives
them, and is guilty of falsehood. Now deceit and falsehood are nothing but
evils, and would only be employed as a medicine, either in the case of sick
and lunatic friends, with a view to their cure, or in that of enemies when
one is taking measures to escape danger. But no sick man or lunatic is a
friend of God, nor does God fear any one to such a degree as to shun danger
by leading him into error." Now the answer to these statements might have
respect partly to the nature of the Divine Word, who is God, and partly to
the soul of Jesus. As respects the nature of the Word, in the same way as
the quality of the food changes in the nurse into milk with reference to the
nature of the child, or is arranged by the physician with a view to the good
of his health in the case of a sick man or (is specially) prepared for a
stronger man, because he possesses greater vigour, so does God appropriately
change, in the case of each individual, the power of the Word to which
belongs the natural property of nourishing the human soul. And to one is
given, as the Scripture terms it, "the sincere milk of the word; "and to
another, who is weaker, as it were, "herbs; "and to another who is
full-grown, "strong meat." And the Word does not, I imagine, prove false to
His own nature, in contributing nourishment to each one, according as he is
capable of receiving Him. [3502] Nor does He mislead or prove false. But
if one were to take the change as referring to the soul of Jesus after it
had entered the body, we would inquire in what sense the term "change" is
used. For if it be meant to apply to its essence, such a supposition is
inadmissible, not only in relation to the soul of Jesus, but also to the
rational soul of any other being. And if it be alleged that it suffers
anything from the body when united with it, or from the place to which it
has come, then what inconvenience [3503] can happen to the Word who, in
great benevolence, brought down a Saviour to the human race?'seeing none of
those who formerly professed to effect a cure could accomplish so much as
that soul showed it could do, by what it performed, even by voluntarily
descending to the level of human destinies for the benefit of our race. And
the Divine Word, well knowing this, speaks to that effect in many passages
of Scripture, although it is sufficient at present to quote one testimony of
Paul to the following effect: "Let this mind be in you which was also in
Christ Jesus; who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be
equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, and took upon Him the
form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men; and being found in
fashion as a man, He humbled Himself, and became obedient unto death, even
the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted Him, and
given Him a name which is above every name." [3504]
Chapter XIX.
Others, then, may concede to Celsus that God does not undergo a change, but
leads the spectators to imagine that He does; whereas we who are persuaded
that the advent of Jesus among men was no mere appearance, but a real
manifestation, are not affected by this charge of Celsus. We nevertheless
will attempt a reply, because you assert, Celsus, do you not, that it is
sometimes allowable to employ deceit and falsehood by way, as it were, of
medicine? [3505] Where, then, is the absurdity, if such a saving result
were to be accomplished, that some such events should have taken place? For
certain words, when savouring of falsehood, produce upon such characters a
corrective effect (like the similar declarations of physicians to their
patients), rather than when spoken in the spirit of truth. This, however,
must be our defence against other opponents. For there is no absurdity in
Him who healed sick friends, healing the dear human race by means of such
remedies as He would not employ preferentially, but only according to
circumstances. [3506] The human race, moreover, when in a state of mental
alienation, had to be cured by methods which the Word saw would aid in
bringing back those so afflicted to a sound state of mind. But Celsus says
also, that "one acts thus towards enemies when taking measures to escape
danger. But God does not fear any one, so as to escape danger by leading
into error those who conspire against him." Now it is altogether unnecessary
and absurd to answer a charge which is advanced by no one against our
Saviour. And we have already replied, when answering other charges, to the
statement that "no one who is either in a state of sickness or mental
alienation is a friend of God." For the answer is, that such arrangements
have been made, not for the sake of those who, being already friends,
afterwards fell sick or became afflicted with mental disease, but in order
that those who were still enemies through sickness of the soul, and
alienation of the natural reason, might become the friends of God. For it is
distinctly stated that Jesus endured all things on behalf of sinners, that
He might free them from sin, and convert them to righteousness.
Chapter XX.
In the next place, as he represents the Jews accounting in a way peculiar to
themselves for their belief that the advent of Christ among them is still in
the future, and the Christians as maintaining in their way that the coming
of the Son of God into the life of men has already taken place, let us, as
far as we can, briefly consider these points. According to Celsus, the Jews
say that "(human) life, being filled with all wickedness, needed one sent
from God, that the wicked might be punished, and all things purified in a
manner analogous to the first deluge which happened." And as the Christians
are said to make statements additional to this, it is evident that he
alleges that they admit these. Now, where is the absurdity in the coming of
one who is, on account of the prevailing flood of wickedness, to purify the
world, and to treat every one according to his deserts? For it is not in
keeping with the character of God that the diffusion of wickedness should
not cease, and all things be renewed. The Greeks, moreover, know of the
earth's being purified at certain times by a deluge or a fire, as Plato,
too, says somewhere to this effect: "And when the gods overwhelm the earth,
purifying it with water, some of them on the mountains," [3507] etc., etc.
Must it be said, then, that if the Greeks make such assertions, they are to
be deemed worthy of respect and consideration, but that if we too maintain
certain of these views, which are quoted with approval by the Greeks, they
cease to be honourable? And yet they who care to attend to the connection
and truth of all our records, will endeavour to establish not only the
antiquity of the writers, but the venerable nature of their writings, and
the consistency of their several parts.
Chapter XXI.
But I do not understand how he can imagine the overturning of the tower (of
Babel) to have happened with a similar object to that of the deluge, which
effected a purification of the earth, according to the accounts both of Jews
and Christians. For, in order that the narrative contained in Genesis
respecting the tower may be held to convey no secret meaning, but, as Celsus
supposes, may be taken as true to the letter, [3508] the event does not on
such a view appear to have taken place for the purpose of purifying the
earth; unless, indeed, he imagines that the so-called confusion of tongues
is such a purificatory process. But on this point, he who has the
opportunity will treat more seasonably when his object is to show not only
what is the meaning of the narrative in its historical connection, but what
metaphorical meaning may be deduced from it. [3509] Seeing that he
imagines, however, that Moses, who wrote the account of the tower, and the
confusion of tongues, has perverted the story of the sons of Aloeus,
[3510] and referred it to the tower, we must remark that I do not think any
one prior to the time of Homer [3511] has mentioned the sons of Aloeus,
while I am persuaded that what is related about the tower has been recorded
by Moses as being much older not only than Homer, but even than the
invention of letters among the Greeks. Who, then, are the perverters of each
other's narratives? Whether do they who relate the story of the Aloadae
pervert the history of the time, or he who wrote the account of the tower
and the confusion of tongues the story of the Aloadae? Now to impartial
hearers Moses appears to be more ancient than Homer. The destruction by
fire, moreover, of Sodom and Gomorrah on account of their sins, related by
Moses in Genesis, is compared by Celsus to the story of Phaethon,'all these
statements of his resulting from one blunder, viz., his not attending to the
(greater) antiquity of Moses. [3512] For they who relate the story of
Phaethon seem to be younger even than Homer, who, again, is much younger
than Moses. We do not deny, then, that the purificatory fire and the
destruction of the world took place in order that evil might be swept away,
and all things be renewed; for we assert that we have learned these things
from the sacred books of the prophets. But since, as we have said in the
preceding pages, the prophets, in uttering many predictions regarding future
events, show that they have spoken the truth concerning many things that are
past, and thus give evidence of the indwelling of the Divine Spirit, it is
manifest that, with respect to things still future, we should repose faith
in them, or rather in the Divine Spirit that is in them.
Chapter XXII.
But, according to Celsus, "the Christians, making certain additional
statements to those of the Jews, assert that the Son of God has been already
sent on account of the sins of the Jews; and that the Jews hating chastised
Jesus, and given him gall to drink, have brought upon themselves the divine
wrath." And any one who likes may convict this statement of falsehood, if it
be not the case that the whole Jewish nation was overthrown within one
single generation after Jesus had undergone these sufferings at their hands.
For forty and two years, I think, after the date of the crucifixion of
Jesus, did the destruction of Jerusalem take place. Now it has never been
recorded, since the Jewish nation began to exist, that they have been
expelled for so long a period from their venerable temple-worship [3513]
and service, and enslaved by more powerful nations; for if at any time they
appeared to be abandoned because of their sins, they were notwithstanding
visited (by God), [3514] and returned to their own country, and recovered
their possessions, and performed unhindered the observances of their law.
One fact, then, which proves that Jesus was something divine and sacred,
[3515] is this, that Jews should have suffered on His account now for a
lengthened time calamities of such severity. And we say with confidence that
they will never be restored to their former condition. [3516] For they
committed a crime of the most unhallowed kind, in conspiring against the
Saviour of the human race in that city where they offered up to God a
worship containing the symbols of mighty mysteries. It accordingly behoved
that city where Jesus underwent these sufferings to perish utterly, and the
Jewish nation to be overthrown, and the invitation to happiness offered them
by God to pass to others,'the Christians, I mean, to whom has come the
doctrine of a pure and holy worship, and who have obtained new laws, in
harmony with the established constitution in all countries; [3517] seeing
those which were formerly imposed, as on a single nation which was ruled by
princes of its own race and of similar manners, [3518] could not now be
observed in all their entireness.
Chapter XXIII.
In the next place, ridiculing after his usual style the race of Jews and
Christians, he compares them all "to a flight of bats or to a swarm of ants
issuing out of their nest, or to frogs holding council in a marsh, or to
worms crawling together in the comer of a dunghill, and quarrelling with one
another as to which of them were the greater sinners, and asserting that God
shows and announces to us all things beforehand; and that, abandoning the
whole world, and the regions of heaven, [3519] and this great earth, he
becomes a citizen [3520] among us alone, and to us alone makes his
intimations, and does not cease sending and inquiring, in what way we may be
associated with him for ever." And in his fictitious representation, he
compares us to "worms which assert that there is a God, and that immediately
after him, we who are made by him are altogether like unto God, and that all
things have been made subject to us,'earth, and water, and air, and
stars,'and that all things exist for our sake, and are ordained to be
subject to us." And, according to his representation, the worms'that is, we
ourselves'say that "now, since certain amongst us commit sin, God will come
or will send his Son to consume the wicked with fire, that the rest of us
may have eternal life with him." And to all this he subjoins the remark,
that "such wranglings would be more endurable amongst worms and frogs than
betwixt Jews and Christians."
Chapter XXIV.
In reply to these, we ask of those who accept such aspersions as are
scattered against us, Do you regard all men as a collection of bats, or as
frogs, or as worms, in consequence of the pre-eminence of God or do you not
include the rest of mankind in this proposed comparison, but on account of
their possession of reason, and of the established laws, treat them as men,
while you hold cheap [3521] Christians and Jews, because their opinions
are distasteful to you, and compare them to the animals above mentioned? And
whatever answer you may return to our question, we shall reply by
endeavouring to show that such assertions are most unbecoming, whether
spoken of all men in general, or of us in particular. For, let it be
supposed that you say justly that all men, as compared with God, are
(rightly) likened to these worthless [3522] animals, since their
littleness is not at all to be compared with the superiority of God, what
then do you mean by littleness? Answer me, good sirs. If you refer to
littleness of body, know that superiority and inferiority, if truth is to be
judge, are not determined by a bodily standard. [3523] For, on such a
view, vultures [3524] and elephants would be superior to us men; for they
are larger, and stronger, and longer-lived than we. But no sensible person
would maintain that these irrational creatures are superior to rational
beings, merely on account of their bodies: for the possession of reason
raises a rational being to a vast superiority over all irrational creatures.
Even the race of virtuous and blessed beings would admit this, whether they
are, as ye say, good demons, or, as we are accustomed to call them, the
angels of God, or any other natures whatever superior to that of man, since
the rational faculty within them has been made perfect, and endowed with all
virtuous qualities. [3525]
Chapter XXV.
But if you depreciate the littleness of man, not on account of his body, but
of his soul, regarding it as inferior to that of other rational beings, and
especially of those who are virtuous; and inferior, because evil dwells in
it,'why should those among Christians who are wicked, and those among the
Jews who lead sinful lives, be termed a collection of bats, or ants, or
worms, or frogs, rather than those individuals among other nations who are
guilty of wickedness?'seeing, in this respect, any individual whatever,
especially if carried away by the tide of evil, is, in comparison with the
rest of mankind, a bat, and worm, and frog, and ant. And although a man may
be an orator like Demosthenes, yet, if stained with wickedness like his,
[3526] and guilty of deeds proceeding, like his, from a wicked nature; or an
Antiphon, who was also considered to be indeed an orator, yet who
annihilated the doctrine of providence in his writings, which were entitled
Concerning Truth, like that discourse of Celsus,'such individuals are
notwithstanding worms, rolling in a comer of the dung-heap of stupidity and
ignorance. Indeed, whatever be the nature of the rational faculty, it could
not reasonably be compared to a worm, because it possesses capabilities of
virtue. [3527] For these adumbrations [3528] towards virtue do not allow
of those who possess the power of acquiring it, and who are incapable of
wholly losing its seeds, to be likened to a worm. It appears, therefore,
that neither can men in general be deemed worms in comparison with God. For
reason, having its beginning in the reason of God, cannot allow of the
rational animal being considered wholly alien from Deity. Nor can those
among Christians and Jews who are wicked, and who, in truth, are neither
Christians nor Jews, be compared, more than other wicked men, to worms
rolling in a corner of a dunghill. And if the nature of reason will not
permit of such comparisons, it is manifest that we must not calumniate human
nature, which has been formed for virtue, even if it should sin through
ignorance, nor liken it to animals of the kind described.
Chapter XXVI.
But if it is on account of those opinions of the Christians and Jews-which
displease Celsus (and which he does not at all appear to understand) that
they are to be regarded as worms and ants, and the rest of mankind as
different, let us examine the acknowledged opinions of Christians and
Jews, [3529] and compare them with those of the rest of mankind, and see
whether it will not appear to those who have once admitted that certain men
are worms and ants, that they are the worms and ants and frogs who have
fallen away from sound views of God, and, under a vain appearance of
piety, [3530] worship either irrational animals, or images, or other
objects, the works of men's hands; [3531] whereas, from the beauty of
such, they ought to admire the Maker of them, and worship Him: while those
are indeed men, and more honourable than men (if there be anything that is
so), who, in obedience to their reason, are able to ascend from stocks and
stones, [3532] nay, even from what is reckoned the most precious of all
matter'silver and gold; and who ascend up also from the beautiful things in
the world to the Maker of all, and entrust themselves to Him who alone is
able to satisfy [3533] all existing things, and to overlook the thoughts
of all, and to hear the prayers of all; who send up their prayers to Him,
and do all things as in the presence of Him who beholds everything, and who
are careful, as in the presence of the Hearer of all things, to say nothing
which might not with propriety be reported to God. Will not such piety as
this'which can be overcome neither by labours, nor by the dangers of death,
nor by logical plausibilities [3534] 'be of no avail in preventing those
who have obtained it from being any longer compared to worms, even if they
had been so represented before their assumption of a piety so remarkable?
Will they who subdue that fierce longing for sexual pleasures which has
reduced the souls of many to a weak and feeble condition, and who subdue it
because they are persuaded that they cannot otherwise have communion with
God, unless they ascend to Him through the exercise of temperance, appear to
you to be the brothers of worms, and relatives of ants, and to bear a
likeness to frogs? What! is the brilliant quality of justice, which keeps
inviolate the rights common to our neighbour, and our kindred, and which
observes fairness, and benevolence, and goodness, of no avail in saving him
who practises it from being termed a bird of the night? And are not they who
wallow in dissoluteness, as do the majority of mankind, and they who
associate promiscuously with common harlots, and who teach that such
practices are not wholly contrary to propriety, worms who roll in
mire?'especially when they are compared with those who have been taught not
to take the "members of Christ," and the body inhabited by the Word, and
make them the "members of a harlot; "and who have already learned that the
body of the rational being, as consecrated to the God of all things, is the
temple of the God whom they worship, becoming such from the pure conceptions
which they entertain of the Creator, and who also, being careful not to
corrupt the temple of God by unlawful pleasure; practise temperance as
constituting piety towards God!
Chapter XXVII.
And I have not yet spoken of the other evils which prevail amongst men, from
which even those who have the appearance of philosophers are not speedily
freed, for in philosophy there are many pretenders. Nor do I say anything on
the point that many such evils are found to exist among those who are
neither Jews nor Christians. Of a truth, such evil practices do not at all
prevail among Christians, if you properly examine what constitutes a
Christian. Or, if any persons of that kind should be discovered, they are at
least not to be found among those who frequent the assemblies, and come to
the public prayers, without their being excluded from them, unless it should
happen, and that rarely, that some one individual of such a character
escapes notice in the crowd. We, then, are not worms who assemble together;
who take our stand against the Jews on those Scriptures which they believe
to be divine, and who show that He who was spoken of in prophecy has come,
and that they have been abandoned on account of the greatness of their sins,
and that we who have accepted the Word have the highest hopes in God, both
because of our faith in Him, and of His ability to receive us into His
communion pure from all evil and wickedness of life. If a man, then, should
call himself a Jew or a Christian, he would not say without qualification
that God had made the whole world, and the vault of heaven [3535] for us
in particular. But if a man is, as Jesus taught, pure in heart, and meek,
and peaceful, and cheerfully submits to dangers for the sake of his
religion, such an one might reasonably have confidence in God, and with a
full apprehension of the word contained in the prophecies, might say this
also: "All these things has God shown beforehand, and announced to us who
believe."
Chapter XXVIII.
But since he has represented those whom he regards as worms, viz., the
Christians, as saying that "God, having abandoned the heavenly regions, and
despising this great earth, takes up His abode amongst us alone, and to us
alone makes His announcements, and ceases not His messages and inquiries as
to how we may become His associates for ever," we have to answer that he
attributes to us words which we never uttered, seeing we both read and know
that God loves all existing things, and loathes [3536] nothing which He
has made, for He would not have created anything in hatred. We have,
moreover, read the declaration: "And Thou sparest all things, because they
ate Thine, O lover of souls. For Thine incorruptible Spirit is in all. And
therefore those also who have fallen away for a little time Thou rebukest,
and admonishest, reminding them of their sins." [3537] How can we assert
that "God, leaving the regions of heaven, and the whole world, and despising
this great earth, takes up His abode amongst us only," when we have found
that all thoughtful persons must say in their prayers, that "the earth is
full of the mercy of the Lord," [3538] and that "the mercy of the Lord is
upon all flesh; " [3539] and that God, being good, "maketh His sun to
arise upon the evil and the good, and sendeth His rain upon the just and the
unjust; " [3540] and that He encourages us to a similar course of action,
in order that we may become His sons, and teaches us to extend the benefits
which we enjoy, so far as in our power, to all men? For He Himself is said
to be the Saviour of all men, especially of them that believe; [3541] and
His Christ to be the "propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but
also for the sins of the whole world." [3542] And this, then, is our
answer to the allegations of Celsus. Certain other statements, in keeping
with the character of the Jews, might be made by some of that nation, but
certainly not by the Christians, who have been taught that "God commendeth
His love towards us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us;
" [3543] and although "scarcely for a righteous man will one die, yet
peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die." [3544] But now
is Jesus declared to have come for the sake of sinners in all parts of the
world (that they may forsake their sin, and entrust themselves to God),
being called also, agreeably to an ancient custom of these Scriptures, the
"Christ of God."
Chapter XXIX.
But Celsus perhaps has misunderstood certain of those whom he has termed
"worms," when they affirm that "God exists, and that we are next to Him."
And he acts like those who would find fault with an entire sect of
philosophers, on account of certain words uttered by some rash youth who,
after a three days' attendance upon the lectures of a philosopher, should
exalt himself above other people as inferior to himself, and devoid of
philosophy. For we know that there are many creatures more honourable
[3545] than man; and we have read that "God standeth in the congregation of
gods," [3546] but of gods who are not worshipped by the nations, "for all
the gods of the nations are idols." [3547] We have read also, that "God,
standing in the congregation of the gods, judgeth among the gods." [3548]
We know, moreover, that "though there be that are called gods, whether in
heaven or in earth (as there be gods many and lords many), but to us there
is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in Him; and one Lord
Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by Him." [3549] And we know
that in this way the angels are superior to men; so that men, when made
perfect, become like the angels. "For in the resurrection they neither marry
nor are given in marriage, but the righteous are as the angels in
heaven," [3550] and also become "equal to the angels." [3551] We know,
too, that in the arrangement of the universe there are certain beings termed
"thrones," and others "dominions," and others "powers," and others
"principalities; "and we see that we men, who are far inferior to these, may
entertain the hope that by a virtuous life, and by acting in all things
agreeably to reason, we may rise to a likeness with all these. And, lastly,
because "it doth not yet appear what we shall be; but we know that when He
shall appear, we shall be like God, and shall see Him as He is." [3552]
And if any one were to maintain what is asserted by some (either by those
who possess intelligence or who do not, but have misconceived sound reason),
that "God exists, and we are next to Him," I would interpret the word
"we," by using in its stead, "We who act according to reason," or rather,
"We virtuous, who act according to reason." [3553] For, in our opinion,
the same virtue belongs to all the blessed, so that the virtue of man and of
God is identical. [3554] And therefore we are taught to become
"perfect," as our Father in heaven is perfect. [3555] No good and
virtuous man, then, is a "worm rolling in filth," nor is a pious man an
"ant," nor a righteous man a "frog; "nor could one whose soul is enlightened
with the bright light of truth be reasonably likened to a "bird of the
night."
Chapter XXX.
It appears to me that Celsus has also misunderstood this statement, "Let Us
make man in Our image and likeness; " [3556] and has therefore
represented the "worms" as saying that, being created by God, we altogether
resemble Him. If, however, he had known the difference between man being
created "in the image of God" and "after His likeness," and that God is
recorded to have said, "Let Us make man after Our image and likeness," but
that He made man "after the image" of God, but not then also "after His
likeness," [3557] he would not have represented us as saying that "we are
altogether like Him." Moreover, we do not assert that the stars are subject
to us; since the resurrection which is called the "resurrection of the
just," and which is understood by wise men, is compared to the sun, and
moon, and stars, by him who said, "There is one glory of the sun, and
another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for one star
differeth from another star in glory. So also is the resurrection of the
dead." [3558] Daniel also prophesied long ago regarding these things.
[3559] Celsus says further, that we assert that "all things have been
arranged so as to be subject to us," having perhaps heard some of the
intelligent among us speaking to that effect, and perhaps also not
understanding the saying, that "he who is the greatest amongst us is the
servant of all." [3560] And if the Greeks say, "Then sun and moon are the
slaves of mortal men," [3561] they express approval of the statement, and
give an explanation of its meaning; but since such a statement is either not
made at all by us, or is expressed in a different way, Celsus here too
falsely accuses us. Moreover, we who, according to Celsus, are "worms," are
represented by him as saying that, "seeing some among us are guilty of sin,
God will come to us, or will send His own Son, that He may consume the
wicked, and that we other frogs may enjoy eternal life with Him." Observe
how this venerable philosopher, like a low buffoon, [3562] turns into
ridicule and mockery, and a subject of laughter, the announcement of a
divine judgment, and of the punishment of the wicked, and of the reward of
the righteous; and subjoins to all this the remark, that "such statements
would be more endurable if made by worms and flogs than by Christians and
Jews who quarrel with one another!" We shall not, however, imitate his
example, nor say similar things regarding those philosophers who profess to
know the nature of all things, and who discuss with each other the manner in
which all things were created, and how the heaven and earth originated, and
all things in them; and how the souls (of men), being either unbegotten, and
not created by God, are yet governed by Him, and pass from one body to
another; [3563] or being formed at the same time with the body, exist for
ever or pass away. For instead of treating with respect and accepting the
intention of those who have devoted themselves to the investigation of the
truth, one might mockingly and revilingly say that such men were "worms,"
who did not measure themselves by their comer of their dung-heap in human
life, and who accordingly gave forth their opinions on matters of such
importance as if they understood them, and who strenuously assert that they
have obtained a view of those things which cannot be seen without a higher
inspiration and a diviner power. "For no man knoweth the things of a man,
save the spirit of man which is in him: even so the things of God knoweth no
man, but the Spirit of God." [3564] We are not, however, mad, nor do we
compare such human wisdom (I use the word "wisdom" in the common
acceptation), which busies itself not about the affairs of the multitude,
but in the investigation of truth, to the wrigglings of worms or any other
such creatures; but in the spirit of truth, we testify of certain Greek
philosophers that they knew God, seeing "He manifested Himself to them,"
[3565] although "they glorified Him not as God, neither were thankful, but
became vain in their imaginations; and professing themselves to be wise,
they became foolish, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an
image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts,
and creeping things." [3566]
Chapter XXXI.
After this, wishing to prove that there is no difference between Jews and
Christians, and those animals previously enumerated by him, he asserts that
the Jews were "fugitives from Egypt, who never performed anything worthy of
note, and never were held in any reputation or account." [3567] Now, on
the point of their not being fugitives, nor Egyptians, but Hebrews who
settled in Egypt, we have spoken in the preceding pages. But if he thinks
his statement, that "they were never held in any reputation or account," to
be proved, because no remarkable event in their history is found recorded by
the Greeks, we would answer, that if one will examine their polity from its
first beginning, and the arrangement of their laws, he will find that they
were men who represented upon earth the shadow of a heavenly life, and that
amongst them God is recognised as nothing else, save He who is over all
things, and that amongst them no maker of images was permitted to enjoy the
rights of citizenship. [3568] For neither painter nor image-maker existed
in their state, the law expelling all such from it; that there might be no
pretext for the construction of images,'an art which attracts the attention
of foolish men, and which drags down the eyes of the soul from God to
earth. [3569] There was, accordingly, amongst them a law to the following
effect: "Do not transgress the law, and make to yourselves a graven image,
any likeness of male or female; either a likeness of any one of the
creatures that are upon the earth, or a likeness of any winged fowl that
flieth under the heaven, or a likeness of any creeping thing that creepeth
upon the earth, or a likeness of any of the fishes which are in the waters
under the earth." [3570] The law, indeed, wished them to have regard to
the truth of each individual thing, and not to form representations of
things contrary to reality, feigning the appearance merely of what was
really male or really female, or the nature of animals, or of birds, or of
creeping things, or of fishes. Venerable, too, and grand was this
prohibition of theirs: "Lift not up thine eyes unto heaven, lest, when thou
seest the sun, and the moon, and the stars, and all the host of heaven, thou
shouldst be led astray to worship them, and serve them." [3571] And what
a regime [3572] was that under which the whole nation was placed, and
which rendered it impossible for any effeminate person to appear in
public; [3573] and worthy of admiration, too, was the arrangement by
which harlots were removed out of the state, those incentives to the
passions of the youth! Their courts of justice also were composed of men of
the strictest integrity, who, after having for a lengthened period set the
example of an unstained life, were entrusted with the duty of presiding over
the tribunals, and who, on account of the superhuman purity of their
character, [3574] were said to be gods, in conformity with an ancient
Jewish usage of speech. Here was the spectacle of a whole nation devoted to
philosophy; and in order that there might be leisure to listen to their
sacred laws, the days termed "Sabbath," and the other festivals which
existed among them, were instituted. And why need I speak of the orders of
their priests and sacrifices, which contain innumerable indications (of
deeper truths) to those who wish to ascertain the signification of things?
Chapter XXXII.
But since nothing belonging to human nature is permanent, this polity also
must gradually be corrupted and changed. And Providence, having remodelled
their venerable system where it needed to be changed, so as to adapt it to
men of all countries, gave to believers of all nations, in place of the
Jews, the venerable religion of Jesus, who, being adorned not only with
understanding, but also with a share of divinity, [3575] and having
overthrown the doctrine regarding earthly demons, who delight in
frankincense, and blood, and in the exhalations of sacrificial odours, and
who, like the fabled Titans or Giants, drag down men from thoughts of God;
and having Himself disregarded their plots, directed chiefly against the
better class of men, enacted laws which ensure happiness to those who live
according to them, and who do not flatter the demons by means of sacrifices,
but altogether despise them, through help of the word of God, which aids
those who look upwards to Him. And as it was the will of God that the
doctrine of Jesus should prevail amongst men, the demons could effect
nothing, although straining every nerve [3576] to accomplish the
destruction of Christians; for they stirred up both princes, and senates,
and rulers in every place,'nay, even nations themselves, who did not
perceive the irrational and wicked procedure of the demons,'against the
word, and those who believed in it; yet, notwithstanding, the word of God,
which is more powerful than all other things, even when meeting with
opposition, deriving from the opposition, as it were, a means of increase,
advanced onwards, and won many souls, such being the will of God. And we
have offered these remarks by way of a necessary digression. For we wished
to answer the assertion of Celsus concerning the Jews, that they were
"fugitives from Egypt, and that these men, beloved by God, never
accomplished anything worthy of note." And further, in answer to the
statement that "they were never held in any reputation or account," we say,
that living apart as a "chosen nation and a royal priesthood," and shunning
intercourse with the many nations around them, in order that their morals
might escape corruption, they enjoyed the protection of the divine power,
neither coveting like the most of mankind the acquisition of other kingdoms,
nor yet being abandoned so as to become, on account of their smallness, an
easy object of attack to others, and thus be altogether destroyed; and this
lasted so long as they were worthy of the divine protection. But when it
became necessary for them, as a nation wholly given to sin, to be brought
back by their sufferings to their God, they were abandoned (by Him),
sometimes for a longer, sometimes for a shorter period, until in the time of
the Romans, having committed the greatest of sins in putting Jesus to death,
they were completely deserted.
Chapter XXXIII.
Immediately after this, Celsus, assailing the contents of the first book of
Moses, which is entitled "Genesis," asserts that "the Jews accordingly
endeavoured to derive their origin from the first race of jugglers and
deceivers, [3577] appealing to the testimony of dark and ambiguous words,
whose meaning was veiled in obscurity, and which they misinterpreted
[3578] to the unlearned and ignorant, and that, too, when such a point had
never been called in question during the long preceding period." Now Celsus
appears to me in these words to have expressed very obscurely the meaning
which he intended to convey. It is probable, indeed, that his obscurity on
this subject is intentional, inasmuch as he saw the strength of the argument
which establishes the descent of the Jews from their ancestors; while again,
on the other hand, he wished not to appear ignorant that the question
regarding the Jews and their descent was one that could not be lightly
disposed of. It is certain, however, that the Jews trace their genealogy
back to the three fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. And the names of these
individuals possess such efficacy, when united with the name of God, that
not only do those belonging to the nation employ in their prayers to God,
and in the exorcising of demons, the words, "God of Abraham, [3579] and
God of Isaac, and God of Jacob," but so also do almost all those who occupy
themselves with incantations and magical rites. For there is found in
treatises on magic in many countries such an invocation of God, and
assumption of the divine name, as implies a familiar use of it by these men
in their dealings with demons. These facts, then'adduced by Jews and
Christians to prove the sacred character of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob,
the fathers of the Jewish race'appear to me not to have been altogether
unknown to Celsus, but not to have been distinctly set forth by him, because
he was unable to answer the argument which might be founded on them.
Chapter XXXIV.
For we inquire of all those who employ such invocations of God, saying: Tell
us, friends, who was Abraham, and what sort of person was Isaac, and what
power did Jacob possess, that the appellation "God," when joined with their
name, could effect such wonders? And from whom have you learned, or can you
learn, the facts relating to these individuals? And who has occupied himself
with writing a history about them, either directly magnifying these men by
ascribing to them mysterious powers, or hinting obscurely at their
possession of certain great and marvellous qualities, patent to those who
are qualified to see them? [3580] And when, in answer to our inquiry, no
one can show from what history'whether Greek or Barbarian'or, if not a
history, yet at least from what mystical narrative, [3581] the accounts
of these men are derived, we shall bring forward the book entitled
"Genesis," which contains the acts of these men, and the divine oracles
addressed to them, and will say, Does not the use by you of the names of
these three ancestors of the race, establishing in the clearest manner that
effects not to be lightly regarded are produced by the invocation of them,
evidence the divinity of the men? [3582] And yet we know them from no
other source than the sacred books of the Jews! Moreover, the phrases, "the
God of Israel," and "the God of the Hebrews," and "the God who drowned in
the Red Sea the king of Egypt and the Egyptians," are formulae [3583]
frequently employed against demons and certain wicked powers. And we learn
the history of the names and their interpretation from those Hebrews, who in
their national literature and national tongue dwell with pride upon these
things, and explain their meaning. How, then, should the Jews attempt to
derive their origin from the first race of those whom Celsus supposed to be
jugglers and deceivers, and shamelessly endeavour to trace themselves and
their beginning back to these?'whose names, being Hebrew, are an evidence to
the Hebrews, who have their sacred books written in the Hebrew language and
letters, that their nation is akin to these men. For up to the present time,
the Jewish names belonging to the Hebrew language were either taken from
their writings, or generally from words the meaning of which was made known
by the Hebrew language.
Chapter XXXV.
And let any one who peruses the treatise of Celsus observe whether it does
not convey some such insinuation as the above, when he says: "And they
attempted to derive their origin from the first race of jugglers and
deceivers, appealing to the testimony of dark and ambiguous words, whose
meaning was veiled in obscurity." For these names are indeed obscure, and
not within the comprehension and knowledge of many, though not in our
opinion of doubtful meaning, even although assumed by those who are aliens
to our religion; but as, according to Celsus, they do not [3584] convey
any ambiguity, I am at a loss to know why he has rejected them. And yet, if
he had wished honestly to overturn the genealogy which he deemed the Jews to
have so shamelessly arrogated, in boasting of Abraham and his descendants
(as their progenitors), he ought to have quoted all the passages bearing on
the subject; and, in the first place, to have advocated his cause with such
arguments as he thought likely to be convincing, and in the next to have
bravely [3585] refuted, by means of what appeared to him to be the true
meaning, and by arguments in its favour, the errors existing on the subject.
But neither Celsus nor any one else will be able, by their discussions
regarding the nature of names employed for miraculous purposes, to lay down
the correct doctrine regarding them, and to demonstrate that those men were
to be lightly esteemed whose names merely, not among their countrymen alone,
but also amongst foreigners, could accomplish (such results). He ought to
have shown, moreover, how we, in misinterpreting [3586] the passages in
which these names are found, deceive our hearers, as he imagines, while he
himself, who boasts that he is not ignorant or unintelligent, gives the true
interpretation of them. And he hazarded the assertion, [3587] in speaking
of those names, from which the Jews deduce their genealogies, that "never,
during the long antecedent period, has there been any dispute about these
names, but that at the present time the Jews dispute about them with certain
others," whom he does not mention. Now, let him who chooses show who these
are that dispute with the Jews, and who adduce even probable arguments to
show that Jews and Christians do not decide correctly on the points relating
to these names, but that there are others who have discussed these questions
with the greatest learning and accuracy. But we are well assured that none
can establish anything of the sort, it being manifest that these names are
derived from the Hebrew language, which is found only among the Jews.
Chapter XXXVI.
Celsus in the next place, producing from history other than that of the
divine record, those passages which bear upon the claims to great antiquity
put forth by many nations, as the Athenians, and Egyptians, and Arcadians,
and Phrygians, who assert that certain individuals have existed among them
who sprang from the earth, and who each adduce proOfs of these assertions,
says: "The Jews, then, leading a grovelling life [3588] in some comer of
Palestine, and being a wholly uneducated people, who had not heard that
these matters had been committed to verse long ago by Hesiod and innumerable
other inspired men, wove together some most incredible and insipid
stories, [3589] viz., that a certain man was formed by the hands of God,
and had breathed into him the breath of life, and that a woman was taken
from his side, and that God issued certain commands, and that a serpent
opposed these, and gained a victory over the commandments of God; thus
relating certain old wives' fables, and most impiously representing God as
weak at the very beginning (of things), and unable to convince even a single
human being whom He Himself had formed." By these instances, indeed, this
deeply read and learned Celsus, who accuses Jews and Christians of ignorance
and want of instruction, clearly evinces the accuracy of his knowledge of
the chronology of the respective historians, whether Greek or Barbarian,
since he imagines that Hesiod and the "innumerable" others, whom he styles
"inspired" men, are older than Moses and his writings'that very Moses who is
shown to be much older than the time of the Trojan war! It is not the Jews,
then, who have composed incredible and insipid stories regarding the birth
of man from the earth, but these "inspired" men of Celsus, Hesiod and his
other "innumerable" companions, who, having neither learned nor heard of the
far older and most venerable accounts existing in Palestine, have written
such histories as their Theogonies, attributing, so far as in their power,
"generation" to their deities, and innumerable other absurdities. And these
are the writers whom Plato expels from his "State" as being corrupters of
the youth, [3590] 'Homer, viz., and those who have composed poems of a
similar description! Now it is evident that Plato did not regard as
"inspired" those men who had left behind them such works. But perhaps it was
from a desire to cast reproach upon us, that this Epicurean Celsus, who is
better able to judge than Plato (if it be the same Celsus who composed two
other books against the Christians), called those individuals "inspired"
whom he did not in reality regard as such.
Chapter XXXVII.
He charges us, moreover, with introducing "a man formed by the hands of
God," although the book of Genesis has made no mention of the "hands" of
God, either when relating the creation or the "fashioning" [3591] of the
man; white it is Job and David who have used the expression, "Thy hands have
made me and fashioned me; " [3592] with reference to which it would need
a lengthened discourse to point out the sense in which these words were
understood by those who used them, both as regards the difference between
"making" and "fashioning," and also the "hands" of God. For those who do not
understand these and similar expressions in the sacred Scriptures, imagine
that we attribute to the God who is over all things a form [3593] such as
that of man; and according to their conceptions, it follows that we consider
the body of God to be furnished with wings, since the Scriptures, literally
understood, attribute such appendages to God. The subject before us,
however, does not require us to interpret these expressions; for, in our
explanatory remarks upon the book of Genesis, these matters have been made,
to the best of our ability, a special subject of investigation. Observe next
the malignity [3594] of Celsus in what follows. For the Scripture,
speaking of the "fashioning" [3595] of the man, says, "And breathed into
his face the breath of life, and the man became a living soul." [3596]
Whereon Celsus, wishing maliciously to ridicule the "inbreathing into his
face of the breath of life," and not understanding the sense in which the
expression was employed, states that "they composed a story that a man was
fashioned by the hands of God, and was inflated by breath blown into
him," [3597] in order that, taking the word" inflated" to be used in a
similar way to the inflation of skins, he might ridicule the statement, "He
breathed into his face the breath of life,"'terms which are used
figuratively, and require to be explained in order to show that God
communicated to man of His incorruptible Spirit; as it is said, "For Thine
incorruptible Spirit is in all things." [3598]
Chapter XXXVIII.
In the next place, as it is his object to slander our Scriptures, he
ridicules the following statement: "And God caused a deep sleep to fall upon
Adam, and he slept: and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh
instead thereof. And the rib, which He had taken from the man, made He a
woman," [3599] and so on; without quoting the words, which would give the
hearer the impression that they are spoken with a figurative meaning. He
would not even have it appear that the words were used allegorically,
although he says afterwards, that "the more modest among Jews and Christians
are ashamed of these things, and endeavour to give them somehow an
allegorical signification." Now we might say to him, Are the statements of
your "inspired" Hesiod, which he makes regarding the woman in the form of a
myth, to be explained allegorically, in the sense that she was given by Jove
to men as an evil thing, and as a retribution for the theft of "the fire;
" [3600] while that regarding the woman who was taken from the side of
the man (after he had been buried in deep slumber), and was formed by God,
appears to you to be related without any rational meaning and secret
signification? [3601] But is it not uncandid, not to ridicule the former
as myths, but to admire them as philosophical ideas in a mythical dress, and
to treat with contempt [3602] the latter, as offending the understanding,
and to declare that they are of no account? For if, because of the mere
phraseology, we are to find fault with what is intended to have a secret
meaning, see whether the following lines of Hesiod, a man, as you say,"
inspired," are not better fitted to excite laughter:'
"Son of Iapetus!' with wrathful heart
Spake the cloud-gatherer: 'Oh, unmatched in art!
Exultest thou in this the flame retrieved,
And dost thou triumph in the god deceived?
But thou, with the posterity of man,
Shalt rue the fraud whence mightier ills began;
I will send evil for thy stealthy fire,
While all embrace it, and their bane desire.'
The sire, who rules the earth, and sways the pole,
Had said, and laughter fill'd his secret soul.
He bade the artist-god his best obey,
And mould with tempering waters ductile clay:
Infuse, as breathing life and form began,
The supple vigour, and the voice of man:
Her aspect fair as goddesses above,
A virgin's likeness, with the brows of love.
He bade Minerva teach the skill that dyes
The web with colours, as the shuttle flies;
He called the magic of Love's Queen to shed
A nameless grace around her courteous head;
Instil the wish that longs with restless aim,
And cares of dress that feed upon the frame:
Bade Hermes last implant the craft refined
Of artful manners, and a shameless mind.
He said; their king th' inferior powers obeyed:
The fictile likeness of a bashful maid
Rose from the temper'd earth, by Jove's behest,
Under the forming god; the zone and vest
Were clasp'd and folded by Minerva's hand:
The heaven-born graces, and persuasion bland
Deck'd her round limbs with chains of gold: the hours
Of loose locks twined her temples with spring flowers.
The whole attire Minerva's curious care
Form'd to her shape, and fitted to her air.
But in her breast the herald from above,
Full of the counsels of deep thundering Jove,
Wrought artful manners, wrought perfidious lies,
And speech that thrills the blood, and lulls the wise.
Her did th' interpreter of gods proclaim,
And named the woman with Pandora's name;
Since all the gods conferr'd their gifts, to charm,
For man's inventive race, this beauteous harm." [3603]
Moreover, what is said also about the casket is fitted of itself to excite
laughter; for example:'
"Whilome on earth the sons of men abode
From ills apart, and labour's irksome load,
And sore diseases, bringing age to man;
Now the sad life of mortals is a span.
The woman's hands a mighty casket bear;
She lifts the lid; she scatters griefs in air:
Alone, beneath the vessel's rims detained,
Hope still within th' unbroken cell remained,
Nor fled abroad; so will'd cloud-gatherer Jove:
The woman's hand had dropp'd the lid above." [3604]
Now, to him who would give to these lines a grave allegorical meaning
(whether any such meaning be contained in them or not), we would say: Are
the Greeks alone at liberty to convey a philosophic meaning in a secret
covering? or perhaps also the Egyptians, and those of the Barbarians who
pride themselves upon their mysteries and the truth (which is concealed
within them); while the Jews alone, with their lawgiver and historians,
appear to you the most unintelligent of men? And is this the only nation
which has not received a share of divine power, and which yet was so grandly
instructed how to rise upwards to the uncreated nature of God, and to gaze
on Him alone, and to expect from Him alone (the fulfilment of) their hopes?
Chapter XXXIX.
But as Celsus makes a jest also of the serpent, as counteracting the
injunctions given by God to the man, taking the narrative to be an old
wife's fable, [3605] and has purposely neither mentioned the paradise
[3606] of God, nor stated that God is said to have planted it in Eden
towards the east, and that there afterwards sprang up from the earth every
tree that was beautiful to the sight, and good for food, and the tree of
life in the midst of the paradise, and the tree of the knowledge of good and
evil, and the other statements which follow, which might of themselves lead
a candid reader to see that all these things had not inappropriately an
allegorical meaning, let us contrast with this the words of Socrates
regarding Eros in the Symposium of Plato, and which are put in the mouth of
Socrates as being more appropriate than what was said regarding him by all
the others at the Symposium. The words of Plato are as follow: "When
Aphrodite was born, the gods held a banquet, and there was present, along
with the others, Porus the son of Metis. And after they had dined, Penia
[3607] came to beg for something (seeing there was an entertainment), and
she stood at the gate. Porus meantime, having become intoxicated with the
nectar (for there was then no wine), went into the garden of Zeus, and,
being heavy with liquor, lay down to sleep. Penia accordingly formed a
secret plot, with a view of freeing herself from her condition of
poverty, [3608] to get a child by Porus, and accordingly lay down beside
him, and became pregnant with Eros. And on this account Eros has become the
follower and attendant of Aphrodite, having been begotten on her birthday
feast, [3609] and being at the same time by nature a lover of the
beautiful, because Aphrodite too is beautiful. Seeing, then, that Eros is
the son of Porus and Penia, the following is his condition. [3610] In the
first place, he is always poor, and far from being delicate and beautiful,
as most persons imagine; but is withered, and sunburnt, [3611] and
unshod, and without a home, sleeping always upon the ground, and without a
covering; lying in the open air beside gates, and on public roads;
possessing the nature of his mother, and dwelling continually with
indigence. [3612] But, on the other hand, in conformity with the
character of his father, he is given to plotting against the beautiful and
the good, being courageous, and hasty, and vehement; [3613] a keen
[3614] hunter, perpetually devising contrivances; both much given to
forethought, and also fertile in resources; [3615] acting like a
philosopher throughout the whole of his life; a terrible [3616] sorcerer,
and dealer in drugs, and a sophist as well; neither immortal by nature nor
yet mortal, but on the same day, at one time he flourishes and lives when he
has plenty, and again at another time dies, and once more is recalled to
life through possessing the nature of his father. But the supplies furnished
to him are always gradually disappearing, so that he is never at any time in
want, nor yet rich; and, on the other hand, he occupies an intermediate
position between wisdom and ignorance." [3617] Now, if those who read
these words were to imitate the malignity of Celsus'which be it far from
Christians to do!'they would ridicule the myth, and would turn this great
Plato into a subject of jest; but if, on investigating in a philosophic
spirit what is conveyed in the dress of a myth, they should be able to
discover the meaning of Plato, (they will admire) [3618] the manner in
which he was able to conceal, on account of the multitude, in the form of
this myth, the great ideas which presented themselves to him, and to speak
in a befitting manner to those who know how to ascertain from the myths the
true meaning of him who wove them together. Now I have brought forward this
myth occurring in the writings of Plato, because of the mention in it of the
garden of Zeus, which appears to bear some resemblance to the paradise of
God, and of the comparison between Penia and the serpent, and the plot
against Porus by Penia, which may be compared with the plot of the serpent
against the man. It is not very clear, indeed, whether Plato fell in with
these stories by chance, or whether, as some think, meeting during his visit
to Egypt with certain individuals who philosophized on the Jewish mysteries,
and learning some things from them, he may have preserved a few of their
ideas, and thrown others aside, being careful not to offend the Greeks by a
complete adoption of all the points of the philosophy of the Jews, who were
in bad repute with the multitude, on account of the foreign character of
their laws and their peculiar polity. The present, however, is not the
proper time for explaining either the myth of Plato, or the story of the
serpent and the paradise of God, and all that is related to have taken place
in it, as in our exposition of the book of Genesis we have especially
occupied ourselves as we best could with these matters.
Chapter XL.
But as he asserts that "the Mosaic narrative most impiously represents God
as in a state of weakness from the very commencement (of things), and as
unable to gain over (to obedience) even one single man whom He Himself had
formed," we say in answer that the objection [3619] is much the same as
if one were to find fault with the existence of evil, which God has not been
able to prevent even in the case of a single individual, so that one man
might be found from the very beginning of things who was born into the world
untainted by sin. For as those whose business it is to defend the doctrine
of providence do so by means of arguments which are not to be despised,
[3620] so also the subjects of Adam and his son will be philosophically
dealt with by those who are aware that in the Hebrew language Adam signifies
man; and that in those parts of the narrative which appear to refer to Adam
as an individual, Moses is discoursing upon the nature of man in general.
[3621] For "in Adam" (as the Scripture [3622] says) "all die," and were
condemned in the likeness of Adam's transgression, the word of God asserting
this not so much of one particular individual as of the whole human race.
For in the connected series of statements which appears to apply as to one
particular individual, the curse pronounced upon Adam is regarded as common
to all (the members of the race), and what was spoken with reference to the
woman is spoken of every woman without exception. [3623] And the
expulsion of the man and woman from paradise, and their being clothed with
tunics of skins (which God, because of the transgression of men, made for
those who had sinned), contain a certain secret and mystical doctrine (far
transcending that of Plato) of the souls losing its wings, [3624] and
being borne downwards to earth, until it can lay hold of some stable
resting-place.
Chapter XLI.
After this he continues as follows: "They speak, in the next place, of a
deluge, and of a monstrous [3625] ark, having within it all things, and
of a dove and a crow [3626] as messengers, falsifying and recklessly
altering [3627] the story of Deucalion; not expecting, I suppose, that
these things would come to light, but imagining that they were inventing
stories merely for young children." Now in these remarks observe the
hostility'so unbecoming a philosopher'displayed by this man towards this
very ancient Jewish narrative. For, not being able to say anything against
the history of the deluge, and not perceiving what he might have urged
against the ark and its dimensions,'viz., that, according to the general
opinion, which accepted the statements that it was three hundred cubits in
length, and fifty in breadth, and thirty in height, it was impossible to
maintain that it contained (all) the animals that were upon the earth,
fourteen specimens of every clean and four of every unclean beast,'he merely
termed it "monstrous, containing all things within it." Now wherein was its
"monstrous" character, seeing it is related to have been a hundred years in
building, and to have had the three hundred cubits of its length and the
fifty of its breadth contracted, until the thirty cubits of its height
terminated in a top one cubit long and one cubit broad? Why should we not
rather admire a structure which resembled an extensive city, if its
measurements be taken to mean what they are capable of meaning, [3628] so
that it was nine myriads of cubits long in the base, and two thousand five
hundred in breadth? [3629] And why should we not admire the design
evinced in having it so compactly built, and rendered capable of sustaining
a tempest which caused a deluge? For it was not daubed with pitch, or any
material of that kind, but was securely coated with bitumen. And is it not a
subject of admiration, that by the providential arrangement of God, the
elements of all the races were brought into it, that the earth might receive
again the seeds of all living things, while God made use of a most righteous
man to be the progenitor of those who were to be born after the deluge?
Chapter XLII.
In order to show that he had read the book of Genesis, Celsus rejects the
story of the dove, although unable to adduce any reason which might prove it
to be a fiction. In the next place, as his habit is, in order to put the
narrative in a more ridiculous light, he converts the "raven" into a
"crow," and imagines that Moses so wrote, having recklessly altered the
accounts related of the Grecian Deucalion; unless perhaps he regards the
narrative as not having proceeded from Moses, but from several individuals,
as appears from his employing the plural number in the expressions,
"falsifying and recklessly altering the story of Deucalion," [3630] as
well as from the words, "For they did not expect, I suppose, that these
things would come to light." But how should they, who gave their Scriptures
to the whole nation, not expect that they would come to light, and who
predicted, moreover, that this religion should be proclaimed to all nations?
Jesus declared, "The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a
nation bringing forth the fruits thereof; " [3631] and in uttering these
words to the Jews, what other meaning did He intend to convey than this,
viz., that He Himself should, through his divine power, bring forth into
light the whole of the Jewish Scriptures, which contain the mysteries of the
kingdom of God? If, then, they peruse the Theogonies of the Greeks, and the
stories about the twelve gods, they impart to them an air of dignity, by
investing them with an allegorical signification; but when they wish to
throw contempt upon our biblical narratives, they assert that they are
fables, clumsily invented for infant children!
Chapter XLIII.
"Altogether absurd, and out of season," [3632] he continues, "is the
(account of the) begetting of children," where, although he has mentioned no
names, it is evident that he is referring to the history of Abraham and
Sarah. Cavilling also at the "conspiracies of the brothers," he allies
either to the story of Cain plotting against Abel, [3633] or, in
addition, to that of Esau against Jacob; [3634] and (speaking) of "a
father's sorrow," he probably refers to that of Isaac on account of the
absence of Jacob, and perhaps also to that of Jacob because of Joseph having
been sold into Egypt. And when relating the "crafty procedure of mothers," I
suppose he means the conduct of Rebecca, who contrived that the blessing of
Isaac should descend, not upon Esau, but upon Jacob. Now if we assert that
in all these cases God interposed in a very marked degree, [3635] what
absurdity do we commit, seeing we are persuaded that He never withdraws His
providence [3636] from those who devote themselves to Him in an
honourable and vigorous [3637] life? He ridicules, moreover, the
acquisition of property made by Jacob while living with Laban, not
understanding to what these words refer: "And those which had no spots were
Laban's, and those which were spotted were Jacob's; " [3638] and he says
that "God presented his sons with asses, and sheep, and camels," [3639]
and did not see that "all these things happened unto them for ensamples, and
were written for our sake, upon whom the ends of the world are come."
[3640] The varying customs (prevailing among the different nations) becoming
famous, [3641] are regulated by the word of God, being given as a
possession to him who is figuratively termed Jacob. For those who become
converts to Christ from among the heathen, are indicated by the history of
Laban and Jacob.
Chapter XLIV.
And erring widely from the meaning of Scripture, he says that "God gave
wells [3642] also to the righteous." Now he did not observe that the
righteous do not construct cisterns, [3643] but dig wells, seeking to
discover the inherent ground and source of potable blessings, [3644]
inasmuch as they receive in a figurative sense the commandment which
enjoins, "Drink waters from your own vessels, and from your own wells of
fresh water. Let not your water be poured out beyond your own fountain, but
let it pass into your own streets. Let it belong to you alone, and let no
alien partake with thee." [3645] Scripture frequently makes use of the
histories of real events, in order to present to view more important truths,
which are but obscurely intimated; and of this kind are the narratives
relating to the "wells," and to the "marriages," and to the various acts of
"sexual intercourse" recorded of righteous persons, respecting which,
however, it will be more seasonable to offer an explanation in the
exegetical writings referring to those very passages. But that wells were
constructed by righteous men in the land of the Philistines, as related in
the book of Genesis, [3646] is manifest from the wonderful wells which
are shown at Ascalon, and which are deserving of mention on account of their
structure, so foreign and peculiar compared with that of other wells.
Moreover, that both young women [3647] and female servants are to be
understood metaphorically, is not our doctrine merely, but one which we have
received from the beginning from wise men, among whom a certain one said,
when exhorting his hearers to investigate the figurative meaning: "Tell me,
ye that read the law, do ye not hear the law? For it is written that Abraham
had two sons; the one by a bond maid, the other by a free woman. But he who
was of the bond woman was born after the flesh; but he of the free woman was
by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants;
the one from the Mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar."
[3648] And a little after, "But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is
the mother of us all." And any one who will take up the Epistle to the
Galatians may learn how the passages relating to the "marriages," and the
intercourse with "the maid-servants," have been allegorized; the Scripture
desiring us to imitate not the literal acts of those who did these things,
but (as the apostles of Jesus are accustomed to call them) the spiritual.
Chapter XLV.
And whereas Celsus ought to have recognised the love of truth displayed by
the writers of sacred Scripture, who have not concealed even what is to
their discredit, [3649] and thus been led to accept the other and more
marvellous accounts as true, he has done the reverse, and has characterized
the story of Lot and his daughters (without examining either its literal or
its figurative meaning) as "worse than the crimes of Thyestes." The
figurative signification of that passage of history it is not necessary at
present to explain, nor what is meant by Sodom, and by the words of the
angels to him who was escaping thence, when they said: "Look not behind
thee, neither stay thou in all the surrounding district; escape to the
mountain, lest thou be consumed; " [3650] nor what is intended by Lot and
his wife, who became a pillar of salt because she turned back; nor by his
daughters intoxicating their father, that they might become mothers by him.
But let us in a few words soften down the repulsive features of the history.
The nature of actions'good, bad, and indifferent'has been investigated by
the Greeks; and the more successful of such investigators [3651] lay down
the principle that intention alone gives to actions the character of good or
bad, and that all things which are done without a purpose are, strictly
speaking, indifferent; that when the intention is directed to a becoming
end, it is praiseworthy; when the reverse, it is censurable. They have said,
accordingly, in the section relating to" things indifferent," that, strictly
speaking, for a man to have sexual intercourse with his daughters is a thing
indifferent, although such a thing ought not to take place in established
communities. And for the sake of hypothesis, in order to show that such an
act belongs to the class of things indifferent, they have assumed the case
of a wise man being left with an only daughter, the entire human race
besides having perished; and they put the question whether the father can
fitly have intercourse with his daughter, in order, agreeably to the
supposition, to prevent the extermination of mankind. Is this to be
accounted sound reasoning among the Greeks, and to be commended by the
influential [3652] sect of the Stoics; but when young maidens, who had
heard of the burning of the world, though without comprehending (its full
meaning), saw fire devastating their city and country, and supposing that
the only means left of rekindling the flame [3653] of human life lay in
their father and themselves, should, on such a supposition, conceive the
desire that the world should continue, shall their conduct be deemed worse
than that of the wise man who, according to the hypothesis of the Stoics,
acts becomingly in having intercourse with his daughter in the case already
supposed, of all men having been destroyed? I am not unaware, however, that
some have taken offence at the desire [3654] of Lot's daughters, and have
regarded their conduct as very wicked; and have said that two accursed
nations'Moab and Ammon'have sprung from that unhallowed intercourse. And yet
truly sacred Scripture is nowhere found distinctly approving of their
conduct as good, nor yet passing sentence upon it as blameworthy.
Nevertheless, whatever be the real state of the case, it admits not only of
a figurative meaning, but also of being defended on its own merits.
[3655]
Chapter XLVI.
Celsus, moreover, sneers at the "hatred" of Esau (to which, I suppose, he
refers) against Jacob, although he was a man who, according to the
Scriptures, is acknowledged to have been wicked; and not clearly stating the
story of Simeon and Levi, who sallied out (on the Shechemites) on account of
the insult offered to their sister, who had been violated by the son of the
Shechemite king, he inveighs against their conduct. And passing on, he
speaks of" brothers selling (one another)," alluding to the sons of Jacob;
and of "a brother sold," Joseph to wit; and of "a father deceived," viz.,
Jacob, because he entertained no suspicion of his sons when they showed him
Joseph's coat of many colours, but believed their statement, and mourned for
his son, who was a slave in Egypt, as if he were dead. And observe in what a
spirit of hatred and falsehood Celsus collects together the statements of
the sacred history; so that wherever it appeared to him to contain a ground
of accusation he produces the passage, but wherever there is any exhibition
of virtue worthy of mention' as when Joseph would not gratify the lust of
his mistress, refusing alike her allurements and her threats'he does not
even mention the circumstance! He should see, indeed, that the conduct of
Joseph was far superior to what is related of Bellerophon, [3656] since
the former chose rather to be shut up in prison than do violence to his
virtue. For although he might have offered a just defence against his
accuser, he magnanimously remained silent, entrusting his cause to God.
Chapter XLVII.
Celsus next, for form's sake, [3657] and with great want of precision,
speaks of "the dreams of the chief butler and chief baker, and of Pharaoh,
and of the explanation of them, in consequence of which Joseph was taken out
of prison in order to be entrusted by Pharaoh with the second place in
Egypt." What absurdity, then, did the history contain, looked at even in
itself, that it should be adduced as matter of accusation by this Celsus,
who gave the title of True Discourse to a treatise not containing doctrines,
but full of charges against Jews and Christians? He adds: "He who had been
sold behaved kindly to his brethren (who had sold him), when they were
suffering from hunger, and had been sent with their asses to purchase
(provisions); "although he has not related these occurrences (in his
treatise). But he does mention the circumstance of Joseph making himself
known to his brethren, although I know not with what view, or what absurdity
he can point out in such an occurrence; since it is impossible for Momus
himself, we might say, to find any reasonable fault with events which, apart
from their figurative meaning, present so much that is attractive. He
relates, further, that "Joseph, who had been sold as a slave, was restored
to liberty, and went up with a solemn procession to his father's funeral,"
and thinks that the narrative furnishes matter of accusation against us, as
he makes the following remark: "By whom (Joseph, namely) the illustrious and
divine nation of the Jews, after growing up in Egypt to be a multitude of
people, was commanded to sojourn somewhere beyond the limits of the kingdom,
and to pasture their flocks in districts of no repute." Now the words, "that
they were commanded to pasture their flocks in districts of no repute," are
an addition, proceeding from his own feelings of hatred; for he has not
shown that Goshen, the district of Egypt, is a place of no repute. The
exodus of the people from Egypt he calls a flight, not at all remembering
what is written in the book of Exodus regarding the departure of the Hebrews
from the land of Egypt. We have enumerated these instances to show that
what, literally considered, might appear to furnish ground of accusation,
Celsus has not succeeded in proving to be either objectionable or foolish,
having utterly failed to establish the evil character, as he regards it, of
our Scriptures.
Chapter XLVIII.
In the next place, as if he had devoted himself solely to the manifestation
of his hatred and dislike of the Jewish and Christian doctrine, he says:
"The more modest of Jewish and Christian writers give all these things an
allegorical meaning; "and, "Because they are ashamed of these things, they
take refuge in allegory." Now one might say to him, that if we must admit
fables and fictions, whether written with a concealed meaning or with any
other object, to be shameful narratives when taken in their literal
acceptation, [3658] of what histories can this be said more truly than of
the Grecian? In these histories, gods who are sons castrate the gods who are
their fathers, and gods who are parents devour their own children, and a
goddess-mother gives to the "father of gods and men" a stone to swallow
instead of his own son, and a father has intercourse with his daughter, and
a wife binds her own husband, having as her allies in the work the brother
of the fettered god and his own daughter! But why should I enumerate these
absurd stories of the Greeks regarding their gods, which are most shameful
in themselves, even though invested with an allegorical meaning? (Take the
instance) where Chrysippus of Soli, who is considered to be an ornament of
the Stoic sect, on account of his numerous and learned treatises, explains a
picture at Samos, in which Juno was represented as committing unspeakable
abominations with Jupiter. This reverend philosopher says in his treatises,
that matter receives the spermatic words [3659] of the god, and retains
them within herself, in order to ornament the universe. For in the picture
at Samos Juno represents matter, and Jupiter god. Now it is on account of
these, and of countless other similar fables, that we would not even in word
call the God of all things Jupiter, or the sun Apollo, or the moon Diana.
But we offer to the Creator a worship which is pure, and speak with
religious respect of His noble works of creation, not contaminating even in
word the things of God; approving of the language of Plato in the Philebus,
who would not admit that pleasure was a goddess, "so great is my reverence,
Protarchus," he says, "for the very names of the gods." We verily entertain
such reverence for the name of God, and for His noble works of creation,
that we would not, even under pretext of an allegorical meaning, admit any
fable which might do injury to the young.
Chapter XLIX.
If Celsus had read the Scriptures in an impartial spirit, he would not have
said that "our writings are incapable of admitting an allegorical
meaning." For from the prophetic Scriptures, in which historical events are
recorded (not from the historical), it is possible to be convinced that the
historical portions also were written with an allegorical purpose, and were
most skilfully adapted not only to the multitude of the simpler believers,
but also to the few who are able or willing to investigate matters in an
intelligent spirit. If, indeed, those writers at the present day who are
deemed by Celsus the "more modest of the Jews and Christians" were the
(first) allegorical interpreters of our Scriptures, he would have the
appearance, perhaps, of making a plausible allegation. But since the very
fathers and authors of the doctrines themselves give them an allegorical
signification, what other inference can be drawn than that they were
composed so as to be allegorically understood in their chief
signification? [3660] And we shall adduce a few instances out of very
many to show that Celsus brings an empty charge against the Scriptures, when
he says "that they are incapable of admitting an allegorical meaning." Paul,
the apostle of Jesus, says: "It is written in the law, Thou shalt not muzzle
the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?
or saith He it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is
written, that he that plougheth should plough in hope, and he that thresheth
in hope of partaking." [3661] And in another passage the same Paul says:
"For it is written, For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother
and shall be joined to his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. This is a
great mystery; but I speak concerning Christ and the Church." [3662] And
again, in another place: "We know that all our fathers were under the cloud,
and all passed through the sea; and were all baptized unto Moses in the
cloud, and in the sea." [3663] Then, explaining the history relating to
the manna, and that referring to the miraculous issue of the water from the
rock, he continues as follows: "And they did all eat the same spiritual
meat, and did all drink the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that
spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ." [3664]
Asaph, moreover, who, in showing the histories in Exodus and Numbers to be
full of difficulties and parables, [3665] begins in the following manner,
as recorded in the book of Psalms, where he is about to make mention of
these things: "Give ear, O my people, to my law: incline your ears to the
words of my mouth. I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter dark
sayings of old, which we have heard and known, and our fathers have told
us." [3666]
Chapter L
Moreover, if the law of Moses had contained nothing which was to be
understood as hating a secret meaning, the prophet would not have said in
his prayer to God, "Open Thou mine eyes, and I will behold wondrous things
out of Thy law; " [3667] whereas he knew that there was a veil of
ignorance lying upon the heart of those who read but do not understand the
figurative meaning, which veil is taken away by the gift of God, when He
hears him who has done all that he can, [3668] and who by reason of habit
has his senses exercised to distinguish between good and evil, and who
continually utters the prayer, "Open Thou mine eyes, and I will behold
wondrous things out of Thy law." And who is there that, on reading of the
dragon that lives in the Egyptian river, [3669] and of the fishes which
lurk in his scales, or of the excrement of Pharaoh which fills the mountains
of Egypt, [3670] is not led at once to inquire who he is that fills the
Egyptian mountains with his stinking excrement, and what the Egyptian
mountains are; and what the rivers in Egypt are, of which the aforesaid
Pharaoh boastfully says, "The rivers are mine, and I have made them; "
[3671] and who the dragon is, and the fishes in its scales,'and this so as
to harmonize with the interpretation to be given of the rivers? But why
establish at greater length what needs no demonstration? For to these things
applies the saying: "Who is wise, and he shall understand these things? or
who is prudent, and he shall know them? " [3672] Now I have gone at some
length into the subject, because I wished to show the unsoundness of the
assertion of Celsus, that "the more modest among the Jews and Christians
endeavour somehow to give these stories an allegorical signification,
although some of them do not admit of this, but on the contrary are
exceedingly silly inventions." Much rather are the stories of the Greeks not
only very silly, but very impious inventions. For our narratives keep
expressly in view the multitude of simpler believers, which was not done by
those who invented the Grecian fables. And therefore not without propriety
does Plato expel from his state all fables and poems of such a nature as
those of which we have been speaking.
Chapter LI.
Celsus appears to me to have heard that there are treatises in existence
which contain allegorical explanations of the law of Moses. These however,
he could not have read; for if he had he would not have said: "The
allegorical explanations, however, which have been devised are much more
shameful and absurd than the fables themselves, inasmuch as they endeavour
to unite with marvellous and altogether insensate folly things which cannot
at all be made to harmonize." He seems to refer in these words to the works
of Philo, or to those of still older writers, such as Aristobulus. But I
conjecture that Celsus has not read their books, since it appears to me that
in many passages they have so successfully hit the meaning (of the sacred
writers), that even Grecian philosophers would have been captivated by their
explanations; for in their writings we find not only a polished style, but
exquisite thoughts and doctrines, and a rational use of what Celsus imagines
to be fables in the sacred writings. I know, moreover, that Numenius the
Pythagorean'a surpassingly excellent expounder of Plato, and who held a
foremost place as a teacher of the doctrines of Pythagoras'in many of his
works quotes from the writings of Moses and the prophets, and applies to the
passages in question a not improbable allegorical meaning, as in his work
called Epops, and in those which treat of "Numbers" and of "Place." And in
the third book of his dissertation on The Good, he quotes also a narrative
regarding Jesus'without, however, mentioning His name'and gives it an
allegorical signification, whether successfully or the reverse I may state
on another occasion. He relates also the account respecting Moses, and
Jannes, and Jambres. [3673] But we are not elated on account of this
instance, though we express our approval of Numenius, rather than of Celsus
and other Greeks, because he was willing to investigate our histories from a
desire to acquire knowledge, and was (duly) affected by them as narratives
which were to be allegorically understood, and which did not belong to the
category of foolish compositions.
Chapter LII.
After this, selecting from all the treatises which contain allegorical
explanations and interpretations, expressed in a language and style not to
be despised, the least important, [3674] such as might contribute,
indeed, to strengthen the faith of the multitude of simple believers, but
were not adapted to impress those of more intelligent mind, he continues:
"Of such a nature do I know the work to be, entitled Controversy between one
Papiscus and Jason, which is fitted to excite pity and hatred instead of
laughter. It is not my purpose, however, to confute the statements contained
in such works; for their fallacy is manifest to all, especially if any one
will have the patience to read the books themselves. Rather do I wish to
show that Nature teaches this, that God made nothing that is mortal, but
that His works, whatever they are, are immortal, and theirs mortal. And the
soul [3675] is the work of God, while the nature of the body is
different. And in this respect there is no difference between the body of a
bat, or of a worm, or of a frog, and that of a man; for the matter [3676]
is the same, and their corruptible part is alike." Nevertheless I could wish
that every one who heard Celsus declaiming and asserting that the treatise
entitled Controversy between Jason and Papiscus regarding Christ was fitted
to excite not laughter, but hatred, could fake the work into his hands, and
patiently listen to its contents; that, finding in it nothing to excite
hatred, he might condemn Celsus out of the book itself. For if it be
impartially perused, it will be found that there is nothing to excite even
laughter in a work in which a Christian is described as conversing with a
Jew on the subject of the Jewish Scriptures, and proving that the
predictions regarding Christ fitly apply to Jesus; although the other
disputant maintains the discussion in no ignoble style, and in a manner not
unbecoming the character of a Jew.
Chapter LIII.
I do not know, indeed, how he could conjoin things that do not admit of
union, and which cannot exist together at the same time in human nature, in
saying, as he did, that "the above treatise deserved to be treated both with
pity and hatred." For every one will admit that he who is the object of pity
is not at the same moment an object of hatred, and that he who is the object
of hatred is not at the same time a subject of pity. Celsus, moreover, says
that it was not his purpose to refute such statements, because he thinks
that their absurdity is evident to all, and that, even before offering any
logical refutation, they will appear to be bad, and to merit both pity and
hatred. But we invite him who peruses this reply of ours to the charges of
Celsus to have patience, and to listen to our sacred writings themselves,
and, as far as possible, to form an opinion from their contents of the
purpose of the writers, and of their consciences and disposition of mind;
for he will discover that they are men who strenuously contend for what they
uphold, and that some of them show that the history which they narrate is
one which they have both seen and experienced, [3677] which was
miraculous, and worthy of being recorded for the advantage of their future
hearers. Will any one indeed venture to say that it is not the source and
fountain of all blessing [3678] (to men) to believe in the God of all
things, and to perform all our actions with the view of pleasing Him in
everything whatever, and not to entertain even a thought unpleasing to Him,
seeing that not only our words and deeds, but our very thoughts, will be the
subject of future judgment? And what other arguments would more effectually
lead human nature to adopt a virtuous life, than the belief or opinion that
the supreme God beholds all things, not only what is said and done, but even
what is thought by us? And let any one who likes compare any other system
which at the same time converts and ameliorates, not merely one or two
individuals, but, as far as in it lies, countless numbers, that by the
comparison of both methods he may form a correct idea of the arguments which
dispose to a virtuous life.
Chapter LIV.
But as in the words which I quoted from Celsus, which are a paraphrase from
the Timaeus, certain expressions occur, such as, "God made nothing mortal,
but immortal things alone, while mortal things are the works of others, and
the soul is a work of God, but the nature of the body is different, and
there is no difference between the body of a man and that of a bat, or of a
worm, or of a frog; for the matter is the same, and their corruptible part
alike,"'let us discuss these points for a little; and let us show that
Celsus either does not disclose his Epicurean opinions, or, as might be said
by one person, has exchanged them for better, or, as another might say, has
nothing in common save the name, with Celsus, the Epicurean. For he ought,
in giving expression to such opinions, and in proposing to contradict not
only us, but the by no means obscure sect of philosophers who are the
adherents of Zeno of Citium, to have proved that the bodies of animals are
not the work of God, and that the great skill displayed in their
construction did not proceed from the highest intelligence. And he ought
also, with regard to the countless diversities of plants, which are
regulated by an inherent, incomprehensible nature, [3679] and which have
been created for the by no means despicable [3680] use of man in general,
and of the animals which minister to man, whatever other reasons may be
adduced for their existence, [3681] not only to have stated his opinion,
but also to have shown us that it was no perfect intelligence which
impressed these qualities upon the matter of plants. And when he had once
represented (various) divinities as the creators of all the bodies, the soul
alone being the work of God, why did not he, who separated these great acts
of creation, and apportioned them among a plurality of creators, next
demonstrate by some convincing reason the existence of these diversities
among divinities, some of which construct the bodies of men, and
others'those, say, of beasts of burden, and others'those of wild animals?
And he who saw that some divinities were the creators of dragons, and of
asps, and of basilisks, and others of each plant and herb according to its
species, ought to have explained the causes of these diversities. For
probably, had he given himself carefully to the investigation of each
particular