And with respect to His having descended among men, He was “previously
in the form of God;”[532] 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_;”[533] nor from “virtue to vice,” for “He knew no _sin_.”[534]
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—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.[535]
Footnote 532:
Cf. Phil. ii. 6, 7.
Footnote 533:
Cf. 1 Pet. ii. 22.
Footnote 534:
Cf. 2 Cor. v. 21.
Footnote 535:
προηγουμένην.