And perhaps there is a danger as great as that which degrades the name
of “God,” or of “the Good,” to improper objects, in changing the name of
God according to a secret system, and applying those which belong to
inferior beings to greater, and _vice versa_. And I do not dwell on
this, that when the name of Zeus is uttered, there is heard at the same
time that of the son of Kronos and Rhea, and the husband of Hera, and
brother of Poseidon, and father of Athene, and Artemis, who was guilty
of incest with his own daughter Persephone; or that Apollo immediately
suggests the son of Leto and Zeus, and the brother of Artemis, and
half-brother of Hermes; and so with all the other names invented by
these wise men of Celsus, who are the parents of these opinions, and the
ancient theologians of the Greeks. For what are the grounds for deciding
that he should on the one hand be properly called Zeus, and yet on the
other should not have Kronos for his father and Rhea for his mother? And
the same argument applies to all the others that are called gods. But
this charge does not at all apply to those who, for some mysterious
reason, refer the word Sabaoth, or Adonai, or any of the other names to
the [true] God. And when one is able to philosophize about the mystery
of names, he will find much to say respecting the titles of the angels
of God, of whom one is called Michael, and another Gabriel, and another
Raphael, appropriately to the duties which they discharge in the world,
according to the will of the God of all things. And a similar philosophy
of names applies also to our Jesus, whose name has already been seen, in
an unmistakeable manner, to have expelled myriads of evil spirits from
the souls and bodies [of men], so great was the power which it exerted
upon those from whom the spirits were driven out. And while still upon
the subject of names, we have to mention that those who are skilled in
the use of incantations, relate that the utterance of the same
incantation in its proper language can accomplish what the spell
professes to do; but when translated into any other tongue, it is
observed to become inefficacious and feeble. And thus it is not the
things signified, but the qualities and peculiarities of words, which
possess a certain power for this or that purpose. And so on such grounds
as these we defend the conduct of the Christians, when they struggle
even to death to avoid calling God by the name of Zeus, or to give Him a
name from any other language. For they either use the common
name—God—indefinitely, or with some such addition as that of the “Maker
of all things,” “the Creator of heaven and earth”—He who sent down to
the human race those good men, to whose names that of God being added,
certain mighty works are wrought among men. And much more besides might
be said on the subject of names, against those who think that we ought
to be indifferent as to our use of them. And if the remark of Plato in
the _Philebus_ should surprise us, when he says, “My fear, O Protagoras,
about the names of the gods is no small one,” seeing Philebus in his
discussion with Socrates had called pleasure a “god,” how shall we not
rather approve the piety of the Christians, who apply none of the names
used in the mythologies to the Creator of the world? And now enough on
this subject for the present.