THE ARGUMENTS OF CELSUS AGAINST THE CHRISTIANS

[Illustration: Celsus]

"THE Christians are accustomed to have private assemblies, which are

forbidden by the law. For of assemblies some are public, and these are

conformable to the law of the land; but others are secret, and these are

such as are hostile to the laws; among which are the Love Feasts of the

Christians *.

* Why the Romans punished the Christians:

"It is commonly regarded as a very curious and remarkable

fact, that, although the Romans were disposed to tolerate

every other religious sect, yet they frequently persecuted

the Christians with unrelenting cruelty. This exception, so

fatal to a peaceable and harmless sect, must have originated

in circumstances which materially distin-...

{2}

"Men who irrationally assent to anything, resemble those who are

delighted with jugglers and enchanters, &c. For as most of these are

depraved characters, who deceive the vulgar, and persuade them to assent

to whatever they please, this also takes place with the Christians. Some

of these are not willing either to give or receive a reason for what

they believe; but are accustomed to say, 'Do not investigate, but

believe, your faith will save you.

...guished them from the votaries of every other religion. The

causes and the pretexts of persecution may have varied at

various periods; but there seems to have been one general

cause which will readily be apprehended by those who are

intimately acquainted with the Roman jurisprudence. From the

most remote period of their history, the Romans had

conceived extreme horror against all nocturnal meetings of a

secret and mysterious nature. A law prohibiting nightly

vigils in a temple has even been ascribed, perhaps with

little probability, to the founder of their state. The laws

of the twelve tables declared it a capital offence to attend

nocturnal assemblies in the city. This, then, being the

spirit of the law, it is obvious that the nocturnal meetings

of the primitive Christians must have rendered them objects

of peculiar suspicion, and exposed them to the animadversion

of the magistrate. It was during the night that they usually

held their most solemn and religious assemblies; for a

practice which may be supposed to have arisen from their

fears, seems to have been continued from the operation of

other causes. Misunderstanding the purport of certain

passages of Scripture, they were...

{3}

'For the wisdom of the world is bad, but folly is good*,'

"The world, according to Moses, was created at a certain time, and has

from its commencement existed for a period far short of ten thousand

years,--The world, however, is without a beginning; in consequence of

which there have been from all eternity many conflagrations, and

many deluges, among the latter of which the most recent is that of

Deucalion**.

...led to imagine that the second advent, of which they lived

in constant expectation, would take place during the night;

and they were accustomed to celebrate nightly vigils at the

tombs of the saints and martyrs. In this case, therefore,

they incurred no penalties peculiar to the votaries of a new

religion, but only such as equally attached to those who,

professing the public religion of the state, were yet guilty

of this undoubted violation of its laws."--Observations on

the Study of the Civil Law, by Dr. Irving, Edin. 1820. p.

11.

"It is not true that the primitive Christians held their assemblies in

the night time to avoid the interruptions of the civil power: but the

converse of that proposition is true in the utmost latitude; viz. that

they met with molestations from that quarter, because their assemblies

were nocturnal."--Elements of Civil Law, by Dr. Taylor, p. 579.

* See Erasmus's Praise of Folly, towards the end.

** See on this subject the Tinusus of Plato.

{4}

"Goatherds and shepherds among the Jews, following Moses as their

leader, and being allured by rustic deceptions, conceived that there is

[only] one God.

"These goatherds and shepherds were of opinion that there is one God,

whether they delight to call him the Most High, or Adonai, or Celestial,

or Sabaoth, or to celebrate by any other name the fabricator of this

world*; for they knew nothing farther. For it is of no consequence,

whether the God who is above all things, is denominated, after the

accustomed manner of the Greeks, Jupiter, or is called by any other

name, such as that which is given to him by the Indians or Egyptians."

Celsus, assuming the person of a Jew, represents him as speaking to

Jesus, and reprehending him for many things. And in the first place he

reproaches him with feigning that he was born of a virgin; and says,

that to his disgrace he was born in a Judaic village from a poor Jewess,

who obtained the means

* In the original there is nothing more than [--------] i.

e. this world; but it is necessary to read, conformably to

the above translation, [--------]. For the Jews did not

celebrate the world, but the Maker of the world, by these

names.

{5}

of subsistence by manual labour. He adds, That she was abandoned by her

husband, who was a carpenter, because she had been found by him to

have committed adultery. Hence, in consequence of being expelled by her

husband, becoming an ignominious vagabond, she was secretly delivered

of Jesus, who, through poverty being obliged to serve as a hireling in

Egypt, learnt there certain arts for which the Egyptians are famous.

Afterwards, returning from thence, he thought so highly of himself,

on account of the possession of these [magical] arts, as to proclaim

himself to be a God. Celsus also adds, That the mother of Jesus became

pregnant with him through a soldier, whose name was Panthera*.

"Was therefore the mother of Jesus beautiful, and was God connected with

her on account of her beauty, though he is not adapted to be in love

with a corruptible body? Or is it not absurd to suppose that God

would be enamoured of a woman who was neither fortunate nor of royal

extraction, nor even scarcely known to her neighbours; and who was also

hated and ejected by the carpenter her

* The same thing is said of Jesus in a work called "The

Gospel according to the Jews, or Toldoth Jesu." See Chap. I.

and II. of that work.

{6}

husband, so as neither to be saved by her own credulity nor by divine

power? These things, therefore, do not at all pertain to the kingdom of

God."

Celsus, again personifying a Jew, says to Christ, "When you were washed

by John, you say that the spectre of a bird flew to you from the air.

But what witness worthy of belief saw this spectre? Or who heard a voice

from heaven, adopting you for a son of God, except yourself, and some

one of your associates, who was equally a partaker of your wickedness

and punishment?

"Jesus having collected as his associates ten or eleven infamous men,

consisting of the most wicked publicans and sailors, fled into different

places, obtaining food with difficulty, and in a disgraceful manner."

Again, in the person of a Jew, Celsus says to Christ, "What occasion

was there, while you were yet an infant, that you should be brought to

Egypt, in order that you might not be slain? For it was not fit that a

God should be afraid of death. But an angel came from heaven, ordering

you and your associates to fly, lest being taken you should be put to

death. For the great God [it seems] could not

{7}

preserve you, his own son, m your own country, but sent two angels on

your account."

The same Jew in Celsus also adds, "Though we do not believe in the

ancient fables, which ascribe a divine origin to Perseus, Amphion,

AEacus, and Minos, yet at the same time their deeds are demonstrated to

be mighty and admirable, and truly superhuman, in order that what

is narrated of their origin may not appear to be improbable." But

(speak-ing to Jesus) he says, "What beautiful or admirable thing have

you said or done, though you was (sp) called upon in the temple to give

some manifest sign that you were the son of God?"

Celsus, pretending not to disbelieve in the miracles ascribed to Christ,

says to him, "Let us grant that these things were performed by you; but

they are common with the works of enchanters, who promise to effect

more wonderful deeds than these, and also with what those who have been

taught by the Egyptians to perform in the middle of the forum for a

few oboli; such as expelling daemons from men, dissipating diseases by a

puff, evocating the souls of heroes, exhibiting sumptuous suppers, and

tables covered with food, which have no reality. These magicians also

represent animals as moving, which are not in reality animals, but

merely appear

{8}

to the imagination to be such.--Is it fit, therefore" that we should

believe these men to be the sons of God, because they worked these

wonders? Or ought we not rather to say, that these are the arts of

depraved and unhappy men!"

Again the Jew says, "It is but recently, and as it were yesterday, since

we punished Christ; and you, who are [in no respect superior to] keepers

of oxen, have abandoned the laws of your ancestors and country. Why

likewise do you begin from our sacred institutions, but afterwards in

the progress [of your iniquity] despise them? For you have no other

origin of your dogma, than our law. Many. other such persons also as

Jesus was, may be seen by those who wish to be deceived. How too is it

probable that we, who have declared to all men that a person would be

sent by God as a punisher of the unjust, should treat him ignominiously,

if such a person had appeared among us? Again: How can we think him to

be a God, who, that I may omit other things, performed, as we learn,

nothing that was promised? And when, being condemned by us, he was

thought worthy of punishment, having concealed himself and fled, was

most disgracefully made a prisoner; being betrayed by those whom he

called his disciples? If, however, he was a God, it was not proper that

he should either fly, or be led

{9]

away captive. And much less was it fit, that, being considered as a

saviour and the son of the greatest God, and; also the messenger of this

God, by his familiars and private associates, he should be deserted and

betrayed by them. But what _excellent_ general, who was the leader of

many myriads of men, was ever betrayed by his soldiers? Indeed, this

has not happened even to the chief of a band of robbers, though a man

depraved, and the captain of men still more depraved than himself, when

to his associates he appeared to be useful. But Christ, who was betrayed

by those of whom he was the leader, though not as a good commander, nor

in such a way as robbers would behave to their captain, could not obtain

the benevolence of his deluded followers.--Many other things also, and

such as are true, respecting Jesus might be adduced, though they are not

committed to writing by his disciples; but these I willingly omit. His

disciples also falsely pretended, that he foreknew and foretold every

thing that happened to him.

"The disciples of Jesus, not being able to adduce any thing respecting

him that was obviously manifest, falsely assert that he foreknew all

things; and have written other things of a similar kind respecting lum.

This, however, is just the same as if some one should assert that a

certain person is a just

{10}

man, and notwithstanding this should show that he acted unjustly; that

he is a pious man, and yet a murderer; and, though immortal, died;

at the same time adding to all these assertions, that he had a

foreknowledge of all things.

"These things Jesus said after he had previously declared that he was

God, and it was entirely necessary that what he had predicted should

take place. He therefore, though a God, induced his disciples and

prophets, with whom he ate and drank, to become impious. It was,

however, requisite that he should have been beneficial to all men, and

particularly to his associates. No one likewise would think of betraying

the man, of whose table he had been a partaker. But here the associate

of the table of God became treacherous to him; God himself, which is

still more absurd, making those who had been hospitably entertained by

him to be his impious betrayers."

The Jew in Celsus also says, that "What is asserted by the Jewish

prophets may be much more probably adapted to ten thousand other persons

than to Jesus. Besides, the prophets say, that he who was to come would

be a great and powerful king, and would be the lord of the whole earth,

and of all nations and armies: but no one would

{11}

infer from such like symbols and rumours, and from such ignoble

arguments, that Christ is the son of God.

"As the sun, which illuminates all other things, first shows himself [to

be the cause of light], thus also it is fit that this should have been

done by the son of God*. But the Christians argue sophistically, when

they say that the son of God is _the word itself_. And the accusation

is strengthened by this, that _the word_ which was announced by the

Christians to be the son of God, was not a pure and holy _word_, but a

man who was most disgracefully punished and put to death.

"What illustrious deed did Jesus accomplish worthy of a God, who beholds

from on high with contempt [the trifling pursuits of] men, and derides

and considers as sport terrestrial events?

"Why too did not Jesus, if not before, yet now at least, [i. e. when he

was brought before Pilate,] exhibit some divine indication respecting

himself; liberate himself from this ignominy, and punish those

* Celsus means that Christ should have given indubitable

evidence, by his sayings, his deeds, and by all that

happened to him, that he was the son of God.

{12}

who had insulted both him and his father? What kind of ichoer also or

blood dropped from his crucified body? was it,.....such as from the

blest immortals flows?"*

The Jew in Celsus further adds: "Do you reproach us with this, O most

faithful men, that we do not conceive Christ to be God, and that we do

not accord with you in believing that he suffered these things for the

benefit of mankind, in order that we also might despise punishment?

Neither did he persuade any one while he lived, not even his own

disciples, that he should be punished, and suffer as he did: nor did he

exhibit himself [though a God] as one liberated from all evils.

"Certainly you Christians will not say, that Christ, when he found

that he could not induce the inhabitants on the surface of the earth to

believe in his doctrines, descended to the infernal regions, in order

that he might persuade those that dwelt there. But if inventing absurd

apologies by which you are ridiculously deceived, what should hinder

others also, who have perished miserably, from being ranked among angels

of a more divine order?"

* See Iliad, V, ver. S40.

{13}

The Jew in Celsus further observes, on comparing Christ with robbers,

"Some might in a similar manner unblushingly say of a robber and a

homicide, who was punished for his crimes, that he was not a robber but

a God; for he predicted to his associates that he should suffer what he

did suffer.

"The disciples of Jesus, living with him, hearing his voice, and

embracing his doctrines, when they saw that he was punished and put to

death, neither died with nor for him, nor could be persuaded to despise

punishment; but denied that they were his disciples. Why, therefore, do

not you Christians [voluntarily] die with your master?"

The Jew in Celsus also says, that "Jesus made converts of ten sailors,

and most abandoned publicans; but did not even persuade all these to

embrace his doctrines.

"Is it not also absurd in the extreme, that so many should believe

in the doctrines of Christ now he is dead, though he was not able to

persuade any one [genuinely] while he was living?

"But the Christians will say, We believe Jesus to be the son of God,

because he cured the lame and the blind, and, as you assert, raised the

dead.

{14}

"O light and truth, which clearly proclaims in its own words, as you

write, that other men, and these depraved and enchanters, will come

among you, possessing similar miraculous powers! Christ also feigns that

a certain being, whom he denominates Satan, will be the source of these

nefarious characters: so that Christ himself does not deny that these

arts possess nothing divine, and acknowledges that they are the works

of depraved men. At the same time likewise, being compelled by truth, he

discloses both the arts of others and his own. Is it not, therefore, a

miserable thing, to consider, from the performance of the same deeds,

this man to be a God, but others to be nothing more than enchanters? For

why, employing his testimony, should we rather think those other workers

of miracles to be more depraved than himself? Indeed Christ confesses

that these arts are not indications of a divine nature, but of certain

impostors, and perfectly wicked characters."

After this, the Jew in Celsus says to his fellow-citizens who believed

in Jesus, as follows: "Let us grant you that Jesus predicted his

resurrection: but how many others have employed such-like prodigies,

in order by a fabulous narration to effect what they wished; persuading

stupid auditors to believe in these miracles? Zamolxis among the

{15}

Scythians, who was a slave of Pythagoras, used this artifice; Pythagoras

also himself, in Italy; and in Egypt, Rhampsinitus. For it is related

of the latter that he played at dice with Ceres in Hades, and that

he brought back with him as a gift from her a golden towel. Similar

artifices were likewise employed by Orpheus among the Odryssians;

by Protesilaus among the Thessalians; and by Hercules and Theseus in

Taenarus. This, however, is to be considered,--whether any one who in

reality died, ever rose again in the same body: unless you think that

the narrations of others are fables,but that your catastrophe of the

drama will be found to be either elegant or probable, respecting what

was said by him who expired on the cross, and the earthquake, and the

darkness, which then according to you ensued. To which may be added,

that he who when living could not help himself, arose, as you say, after

he was dead, and exhibited the marks of his punishment, and his hands

which had been perforated on the cross. But who was it that saw this?

A furious woman, as you acknowledge, or some other of the same magical

sect; or one who was under the delusion of dreams, and who voluntarily

subjected himself to fallacious phantasms,--a thing which happens

to myriads of the human race. Or, which is more probable, those who

pretended to see this were such as wished to astonish others by

{16}

this prodigy, and, through a false narration of this kind, to give

assistance to the frauds of other impostors.

"Is it to be believed that Christ, when he was alive, openly announced

to all men what he was; but when it became requisite that he should

procure a strong belief of his resurrection from the dead, he should

only show himself secretly to one woman and to his associates?

"If also Christ wished to be concealed, why was a voice heard from

heaven, proclaiming him to be the son of God? Or, if he did not wish

to be concealed, why did he suffer punishment, and why did, he

[ignominiously] die?"

The Jew in Celsus likewise adds, "These things therefore we have adduced

to you from your own writings, than which we have employed no other

testimony, for you yourselves are by them confuted. Besides, what God

that ever appeared to men, did not procure belief that he was a God,

particularly when he appeared to those who expected his advent? Or why

was he not acknowledged by those, by whom he had been for a long time

expected? We certainly hope for a resurrection in the body, and that we

shall have eternal life. We

{17}

also believe that the paradigm and primary leader of this, will be he

who is to be sent to us; and who will show that it is not impossible for

God to raise _any one_ with his body that he pleases."

After this, Celsus in his own person says, "The Christians and Jews most

stupidly contend with each other, and this controversy of theirs about

Christ differs in nothing from the proverb about the contention for the

shadow of an ass*. There is also nothing venerable in the investigation

of the Jews and Christians with each other; both of them believing that

there was a certain prophecy from a divine spirit, that a saviour of the

human race would appear on the earth, but disagreeing in their opinion

whether he who was predicted had appeared or not.

"The Jews originating from the Egyptians deserted Egypt through

sedition, at the same time despising the religion of the Egyptians.

Hence the

* This proverb is mentioned by Apuleius at the end of the

Ninth Book of his Metamorphosis. There is also another Greek

proverb mentioned by Menander, Plato, and many others,

[--------], concerning the shadow of an ass, which is said of

those who are anxious to know things futile, frivolous, and

entirely useless. These two proverbs Apuleius has merged

into one.

{18}

same thing happened to the Christians afterwards, who abandoned the

religion of the Jews, as to the Jews who revolted from the Egyptians;

for the cause to both of their innovation was a seditious opposition to

the common* and established rites of their country.

"The Christians at first, when they were few, had but one opinion; but

when they became scattered through their multitude, they were again and

again divided into sects, and each sect wished to have an establishment

of its own. For this was what they desired to effect from the beginning.

"But after they were widely dispersed one sect opposed the other, nor

did any thing remain common

to them except the name of Christians; and even this they were at the

same time ashamed to leave as a common appellation: but as to other

things, they were the ordinances of men of a different persuasion.

"What however is still more wonderful is this, that their doctrine may

be [easily] confuted, as consisting of no hypothesis worthy of belief.

But their

* In the original [--------], but it is necessary to read,

conformably to the above translation, [--------]

{19}

dissension among themselves, the advantage they derive from it, and

their dread of those who are not of their belief, give stability to

their faith.

"The Christians ridicule the Egyptians, though they indicated many and

by no means contemptible things through enigmas, when they taught that

honours should be paid to _eternal_ ideas, and not, as it appears to the

vulgar, to diurnal animals*." Celsus adds, that "The Christians

stupidly introduce nothing more venerable than the goats and dogs of the

Egyptians in their narrations respecting Jesus.

"What is said by a few who are considered as Christians, concerning the

doctrine of Jesus and the precepts of Christianity, is not designed for

the wiser, but for the more unlearned and ignorant part of mankind. For

the following are their precepts: 'Let no one who is erudite accede

to us, no one who is wise, no one who is prudent (for these things are

thought by us to be evil); but let any one who is unlearned, who is

stupid, who is an infant in understanding boldly come to us.' For the

Christians openly acknowledge that such as these are worthy

* See on this subject the Treatise of Plutarch respecting

Isis and Osiris.

{20}

to be noticed by their God; manifesting by this, that they alone wish

and are able to persuade the ignoble, the insensate, slaves, stupid

women, and little children and fools.

"We may see in the forum infamous characters and jugglers* collected

together, who dare not show their tricks to intelligent men; but

when they perceive a lad, and a crowd of slaves and stupid men, they

endeavour to ingratiate themselves with such characters as these.

"We also may see in their own houses, wool-weavers, shoemakers,

fullers, and the most illiterate and rustic men, who dare not say any

thing in the presence of more elderly and wiser fathers of families;

but when they meet with children apart from their parents, and certain

stupid women with them, then they discuss something of a wonderful

nature; such as that it is not proper to pay attention to parents and

preceptors, but that they should be persuaded by them. For, say they,

your parents and preceptors are delirious and stupid, and neither know

what is truly good, nor are able to effect it, being prepossessed with

trifles of an unusual nature. They

* Celsus, as we are informed by Origen, compares the

Christians with men of this description.

{21}

add, that they alone know how it is proper to live, and that if children

are persuaded by them, they will be blessed, and also the family to

which they belong. At the same time likewise that they say this, if

they see any one of the wiser teachers of erudition approaching, or the

father of the child to whom they are speaking, such of them as are more

cautious defer their discussion to another time; but those that are

more audacious, urge the children to shake off the reins of parental

authority, whispering to them, that when their fathers and preceptors

are present, they neither wish nor are able to unfold to children what

is good, as they are deterred by the folly and rusticity of these men,

who are entirely corrupted, are excessively depraved, and would punish

them [their true admonishers]. They further add, that if they wish

to be instructed by them, it is requisite that they should leave their

parents and preceptors, and go with women and little children, who are

their playfellows, to the conclave of women, or to the shoemaker's

or fuller's shop, that they may obtain perfection [by embracing their

doctrines].

"That I do not however accuse the Christians more bitterly than truth

compels, may be conjectured from hence, that the criers who call men to

other mysteries proclaim as follows: 'Let him approach,

{22}

whose hands are pure, and whose words are wise.' And again, others

proclaim: 'Let him approach, who is pure from all wickedness, whose soul

is not conscious of any evil, and who leads a just and upright life.'

And these things are proclaimed by those who promise a purification from

error. Let us now hear who those are that are called to the Christian

mysteries. '_Whoever is a sinner, whoever is unwise, whoever is a

fool, and whoever, in short, is miserable, him the kingdom of God will

receive_.' Do you not therefore call a sinner, an unjust man, a thief,

a housebreaker, a wizard, one who is sacrilegious, and a robber of

sepulchres? What other persons would the crier nominate, who should call

robbers together?

"God, according to the Christians, descended to men; and, as consequent

to this, it was fancied that he had left his own proper abode.

"God, however, being unknown among men [as the Christians say], and in

consequence of this appearing to be in a condition inferior to that of

a divine being, was not willing to be known, and therefore made trial of

those who believed and of those who did not believe in him; just as

men who have become recently rich, call on God as a witness of their

abundant and entirely mortal ambition.

{23}

"The Christians have asserted nothing paradoxical or new concerning a

deluge or a conflagration, but have perverted the doctrine of the

Greeks and barbarians, that in long periods of time, and recursions and

concursions of the stars, conflagrations and deluges take place; and

also that after the last deluge, which was that of Deucalion, the period

required, conformably to the mutation of wholes, a conflagration*.

This the Christians, however, have perverted by representing God as

descending with fire as a spy.

"Again, we will repeat and confirm by many arguments, an assertion which

has nothing in it novel, but was formerly universally acknowledged. God

is good, is beautiful and blessed, and his very nature consists in that

which is most beautiful and the best. If therefore he descended to men,

his nature must necessarily be changed. But the change must be from good

to evil, and from the beautiful to the base, from felicity to

infelicity, and from that which is most excellent to that which is most

worthless. Who, however, would choose to be thus changed? Besides, to be

changed and transformed pertains to that which is naturally mortal; but

an invariable

* See Taylor's translation of Proclus on the Timaeus of

Plato, Book I.

{24}

sameness of subsistence is the prerogative of an immortal nature. Hence

God could never receive a mutation of this kind*.

"Either God is in reality changed, as the Christians say, into a mortal

body,--and we have before shown that this is impossible; or he himself

is not changed, but he causes those who behold him to think that he is,

and thus falsifies himself, and involves others in error. Deception,

however, and falsehood are indeed otherwise evil, and can only be

[properly] employed by any one as a medicine, either in curing friends

that are diseased or have some vicious propensity, or those that are

insane, or for the purpose of avoiding danger from enemies. But no one

who has vicious propensities, or is insane, is dear to Divinity.

Nor does God fear any one, in order that by wandering he may escape

danger**.

* See a most admirable defence of the immutability of

Divinity, by Proclus, in Taylor's Introduction to the Second

and Third Books of Plato's Republic, in vol. i. of his

translation of Plato's Works. See also Taylor's note at the

end of vol. iii. of his translation of Pausanias, p. 235.

** The original of this sentence is, [--------] the latter

part of which, [--------], is thus, erroneously translated

by Spencer, "ut imposture opus habeat ad evadendum

periculum."

{25}

"The Christians, adding to the assertions of the Jews, say that the

son of God came on account of the sins of the Jews; and that the Jews,

punishing Jesus and causing him to drink _gall_, raised the _bile_ of

God against them."

Celsus after this, in his usual way deriding both Jews and Christians,

compares all of them to a multitude of bats, or to ants coming out of

their holes, or to frogs seated about a marsh, or to earthworms that

assemble in a corner of some muddy place, and contend with each other

which of them are most noxious. He likewise represents them as saying,

"God has manifested and predicted all things to us; and deserting

the whole world and the celestial circulation, and likewise paying no

attention to the widely-extended earth, he regards our concerns alone,

to us alone sends messengers, and he will never cease to explore by what

means we may always associate with him." He likewise resembles us

to earthworms acknowledging that God exists; and he says that we

earthworms, i. e. the Jews and Christians, being produced by God after

him, are entirely similar to him. All things too are subject to

us, earth and water, the air and the stars, and are ordained to be

subservient to us*. Afterwards

* This reminds me of the following beautiful lines in...

{26}

these earthworms add: "Now because some of us have sinned, God will

come, or he will send his son, in order that he may burn the unjust,

and that those who are not so may live eternally with him." And Celsus

concludes with observing that "such assertions would be more tolerable

if they were made by earthworms or frogs, than by Jews or Christians

contending with each other."

Celsus, after having adduced, from the writings of the heathens,

instances of those who contended for the antiquity of their race, such

as the Athenians, Egyptians, Arcadians, and Phrygians, and also of those

who have asserted that some among them were aborigines, says, that

"the Jews being concealed in a corner of Palestine, men perfectly

in-erudite, and who never had previously heard the same things

celebrated by Hesiod and innumerable

...Epistle I. of Pope's Essay on Man, in which Pride is

represented as saying:

"For me kind nature wakes her genial power,

Suckles each herb, and spreads out every flower;

Annual for me the grape, the rose, renew

The juice nectarious and the balmy dew.

For me the mine a thousand treasures brings:

For me health gushes from a thousand springs;

Seas roll to waft me, suns to light me rise,

My footstool earth, my canopy the skies."

{27}

other divine men, composed a most incredible and inelegant narration,

that a certain man was fashioned by the hands of God, and inspired by

him with the breath of life; that a woman was taken from the side of

the man; that precepts were given to them by God; and that a serpent was

adverse to these precepts. Lastly, they make the serpent to frustrate

the commands of God: in all this, narrating a certain fable worthy only

of being told by old women, and which most impiously makes God to be

from the first imbecile, and incapable of persuading one man fashioned

by himself to act in a way conformable to his will.

"The Christians are most impiously deceived and involved in error,

through the greatest ignorance of the meaning of divine enigmas. For

they make a certain being whom they call the Devil, and who in the

Hebrew tongue is denominated Satan, hostile to God. It is therefore

perfectly stupid and unholy to assert that the greatest God, wishing to

benefit mankind, was incapable of accomplishing what he wished, through

having one that opposed him, and acted contrary to his will. The son of

God, therefore, was vanquished by the devil; and being punished by him,

teaches us also to despise the punishments inflicted by him; Christ at

the same time predicting that Satan would appear on

{28}

the earth, and, like himself, would exhibit great and admirable works,

usurping to himself the glory of God. The son of God also adds, that it

is not fit to pay attention to Satan, because he is a seducer, but

that himself alone is worthy of belief. This, however, is evidently the

language of a man who is an impostor earnestly endeavouring to prevent,

and previously guarding himself against, the attempts of those who think

differently from and oppose him. But, according to the Christians, the

son of God is punished by the devil, who also punishes us in order

that through this we may be exercised in endurance. These assertions,

however, are perfectly ridiculous. For it is fit, I think, that the

devil should be punished, and not that men should be threatened with

punishment who are calumniated by him.

"Further still: If God, like Jupiter in the comedy, being roused from

a long sleep, wished to liberate the human race from evils, why did

he send only into a corner of the earth this spirit of whom you boast?

though he ought in a similar manner to have animated many other bodies,

and to have sent them to every part of the habitable globe. The comic

poet indeed, in order to excite the laughter of the audience in the

theatre, says that Jupiter, after he was roused from his sleep, sent

Mercury to the Athenians and Lacedaemonsians:--but do not

{29}

you think that it is a much more ridiculous fiction to assert that God

sent his son to the Jews?

"Many--and these, men whose names are not known,--both in temples and

out of temples, and some also assembling in cities or armies, are easily

excited from any casual cause, as if they possessed a prophetic power.

Each of these likewise is readily accustomed to say, 'I am God, or the

son of God, or a divine spirit. But I came because the world will soon

be destroyed, and you, O men! on account of your iniquities will perish.

I wish, however, to save you, and you shall again see me, returning with

a celestial army. Blessed is he who now worships me; but I will cast

all those who do not, into eternal fire, together with the cities and

regions to which they belong. Those men also that do not now know the

punishments which are reserved for them, shall afterwards repent and

lament in vain: but those who believe in me I will for ever save.'

Extending to the multitude these insane and perfectly obscure

assertions, the meaning of which no intelligent man is able to

discover,--for they are unintelligible and a mere nothing,--they afford

an occasion to the stupid and to jugglers of giving to them whatever

interpretation they please.

"Again, they do not consider, if the prophets of

{30}

the God of the Jews had predicted that this would be his son, why did

this God legislatively ordain through Moses, that the Jews should enrich

themselves and acquire power; should fill the earth with their progeny;

and should slay and cut off the whole race of their enemies, which Moses

did, as he says, in the sight of the Jews; and besides this, threatening

that unless they were obedient to these his commands, he should consider

them as his enemies;--why, after these things had been promulgated by

God, did his son, a Nazarean man, exclude from any access to his father,

the rich and powerful, the wise and renowned? For he says that we ought

to pay no more attention than ravens do, to food and the necessaries of

life*, and that we should be less concerned about our clothing than the

lilies of the field. Again, he asserts, that to him who smites us on

one cheek we should likewise turn the other**. Whether, therefore, does

Moses or Jesus lie? Or, was the Father who sent Jesus forgetful of what

he had formerly said to Moses? Or, condemning his own laws, did he alter

his opinion, and send a messenger to mankind with mandates of a contrary

nature?

* Luke xii. 24.

** Luke vi. 29.

{31}

"The Christians again will say, How can God be known unless he can be

apprehended by sense? To this we reply, that such a question is not the

interrogation of man, nor of soul, but of _the flesh_. At the same time,

therefore, let them hear, if they are capable of hearing any thing, _as

being a miserable worthless race, and lovers of body!_ If, closing the

perceptive organs of sense, you look upward with the visive power of

intellect, and, averting the eye of the _flesh,_ you excite the eye

of the soul, you will thus alone behold God*. And if you seek for the

leader of this path, you must avoid impostors and enchanters, and those

who persuade you to pay attention to [real] idols; in order that you may

not be entirely ridiculous, by blaspheming as idols other things which

are manifestly Gods**, and venerating that which is in reality more

worthless than any image, and which is not even an image, but _a dead

body_***; and by investigating a Father similar to it.

* This is most Platonically said by Celsus.

** Such as the sun and moon, and the other heavenly bodies.

*** The Emperor Julian in the fragments of his Arguments

against the Christians, 'preserved by Cyril, says, speaking

to the Christians: "You do not notice whether any thing is

said by the Jews about holiness; but you emulate their rage

and their bitterness, overturning temples and altars, and

cutting the throats not only of those who remain firm in

paternal institutes, but also of...

{32}

"There are essence and generation, the intelligible and the visible.

And truth indeed subsists with essence, but error with generation*.

Science, therefore, is conversant with truth, but opinion with

generation. Intelligence also pertains to, or has the intelligible for

its object; but what is visible is the object of sight. And intellect

indeed knows the intelligible; but the eye knows that which is visible.

What the sun therefore is in the visible region,--being neither the eye,

nor sight, but the cause to the eye of seeing, and to the sight of its

visive power, to all sensibles of their being generated, and to

himself of being perceived;--this the supreme God [or _the good_] is

in intelligibles: since he is neither intellect, nor intelligence, nor

science, but is the cause, to intellect, of intellectual perception;

...those heretics who are equally erroneous with yourselves,

and who do not lament a dead body in the same manner as you

do. For neither Jesus nor Paul exhorted you to act in this

manner. But the reason is, that they did not expect you

would arrive at the power which you have obtained. For they

were satisfied if they could deceive maid-servants and

slaves, and through these married women, and such men as

Cornelius and Sergius; among whom, if you can mention one

that was at that time an illustrious character, (and these

things were transacted under the reign of Tiberius or

Claudius,) believe that I am a liar in all things."

* Generation signifies the whole of that which is visible.

{33}

to intelligence, of its subsistence on account of him; to science, for

its possession of knowledge for his sake, and to all intelligibles for

their existence as such. He is likewise the cause to truth itself and

to essence itself, of their existence, being himself beyond all

intelligibles, by a certain ineffable power*. And these are the

assertions of men who possess intellect. But if you understand any thing

of what is here said, you are indebted to us for it. If, likewise, you

think that a certain spirit descending from God announced to you things

of a divine nature, this will be the spirit which proclaimed what I have

above said, and with which ancient men being replete, have unfolded so

many things of a most beneficial nature. If, therefore, you are unable

to understand these assertions, be silent, and conceal your ignorance,

and do not say that those are blind who see, and that those are lame who

run,

* This sentence in the original is as follows: [--------].

But it is requisite to read, conformably to the above

translation, [--------]. Celsus has derived what he here

says from the Sixth Book of Plato's Republic, and what he

says previous to this from the Timaeeus of Plato.--See

Taylor's translation of these Dialogues.

{34}

you at the same time possessing souls that are in every respect lame and

mutilated, and living in body, viz. in that which is dead.

"How much better would it be for you, since you are desirous of

innovation, to direct your attention to some one of the illustrious

dead, and concerning whom a divine fable may be properly admitted! And

if Hercules and Esculapius do not please you, and other renowned men of

great antiquity, you may have Orpheus, a man confessedly inspired by a

sacred spirit, and who suffered a violent death. But he perhaps has been

adopted as a leader formerly by others. Consider Anaxarchus, therefore,

who being thrown into a mortar, and bruised in the cruellest manner,

most courageously despised the punishment, exclaiming, 'Bruise, bruise

the sack of Anaxarchus, for you cannot bruise him.' This, indeed,

was uttered by a certain truly divine spirit. Him, however, some

physiologists have already vindicated to themselves. In the next place,

consider Epictetus, who when his master twisted his leg violently, said,

smiling gently and without being terrified, 'You will break my leg;' and

when his master had broken his leg, only observed, 'Did I not tell you

that you would break it? What thing of this kind did your God utter when

{35}

he was punished*? The sibyl, likewise, whose verses are used by some of

you, is far more worthy to be regarded by you as the daughter of God.

_But now you have fraudulently and rashly inserted in her verses many

things of a blasphemous nature_**; and Christ, who in his life was most

reprehensible, and in his death most miserable, you reverence as a God.

How much more appropriately might you have bestowed this honour on Jonas

when he was under the gourd, or on Daniel who was saved in the den

of lions, or on others of whom more prodigious things than these are

narrated!

"This is one of the precepts of the Christians: 'Do not revenge yourself

on him who injures you; and if any person strikes you on one cheek,

turn the other to him also.' And this precept indeed is of very great

antiquity, but is recorded in a more rustic

* Christ when on the cross exclaimed, "My God, my God, why

hast thou forsaken me?" But Socrates in his Apology to his

Judges, as recorded by Plato, most magnanimously said,

"Anytus and Melitus may indeed put me to death, but they

cannot injure me."

** The collection of the Sibylline Oracles which are now

extant, are acknowledged by all intelligent men among the

learned to be for the most part forgeries.--See the account

of them by Fabricius in vol. i. of his Bibliootheca Graeca,

{36}

manner by Christ. For Socrates is made by Plata in the Crito to speak

as follows: 'It is by no means therefore proper to do an injury. By no

means. Hence neither is it proper for him who is injured to revenge the

injury, as the multitude think it is; since it is by no means fit to do

an injury. It does not appear that it is. But what! is it proper or

not, O Crito, to be malific? It certainly is not proper, Socrates. Is it

therefore just or unjust for a man to be malific to him by whom he has

been hurt? for in the opinion of the vulgar it is just. It is by

no means just. For to be hurtful to men does not at all differ from

injuring them. You speak the truth. Neither, therefore, is it proper to

revenge an injury, nor to be hurtful to any man, whatever evil we may

suffer from him.' These things are asserted by Plato, who also adds:

'Consider, therefore, well, whether you agree, and are of the same

opinion with me in this; and we will begin with admitting, that it is

never right either to do an injury, or revenge an injury on him who has

acted badly towards us. Do you assent to this principle? For formerly it

appeared, and now still appears, to me to be true.' Such, therefore,

was the opinion of Plato, and which also was the doctrine of divine men

prior to him. Concerning these, however, and other particulars which the

Christians have corrupted, enough has been said. For he who

{37}

desires to search further into them, may easily be satisfied.

"But why is it requisite to enumerate how many things have been

foretold with a divinely inspired voice, partly by prophetesses and

prophets, and partly by other men and women under the influence of

inspiration? What wonderful things they have heard from the adyta

themselves! How many things have been rendered manifest from victims and

sacrifices to those who have used them! How many from other prodigious

symbols! And to some persons, divinely luminous appearances have been

manifestly present. Of these things indeed the life of every one is

full. How many cities, likewise, have been raised from oracles, and

liberated from disease and pestilence! And how many, neglecting these,

or forgetting them, have perished miserably! How many colonies have been

founded from these, and by observing their mandates have been rendered

happy! How many potentates and private persons have, from attending to

or neglecting these, obtained a better or a worse condition! How many,

lamenting their want of children, have through these obtained the object

of their wishes! How many have escaped the anger of daemons! How many

mutilated bodies have been healed! And again, how many have immediately

suffered for insolent behaviour in

{38}

sacred concerns! some indeed becoming insane on the very spot; others

proclaiming their impious deeds, but others not proclaiming them before

they perished; some destroying themselves, and others becoming a prey

to incurable diseases. And sometimes a dreadful voice issuing from the

adyta has destroyed them*.

"In the next place, is it not absurd that you should desire and hope

for the resurrection of the body, as if nothing was more excellent or

more honourable to us than this; and yet again, that you should hurl

this same body into punishments, as a thing of a vile nature? To men,

however, who are persuaded that this is true, and who are conglutinated

to body, it is not worth while to speak of things of this kind. For

these are men who in other respects are rustic and impure, without

reason, and labouring under the disease of sedition. Indeed, those who

hope that the soul or intellect will exist eternally, whether they

are willing to call it pneumatic**, or an intellectual spirit holy and

blessed, or a living soul, or the supercelestial and

* See the scientific theory of Oracles unfolded in the Notes

to Taylor's translation of Pausanias, vol. iii. p. 259.

** This is said conformably to the opinion of the Stoics.

{39}

incorruptible progeny of a divine and incorporeal nature*, or whatever

other appellation they may think fit to give it; those who thus hope,

(but I say this in accordance with Divinity,) in this respect think

rightly, that those who have lived well in this life will be blessed,

but that those who have been entirely unjust, will be involved in

endless evils. And neither the Christians nor any other man were ever

hostile to this dogma.

"Since men are bound to body, whether they are so for the sake of the

dispensation of the whole of things, or in order that they may suffer

the punishment of their offences, or in consequence of the soul through

certain passions becoming heavy and tending downwards, till through

certain orderly periods it becomes purified;--for according to

Empedocles, it is necessary that

'From the blest wandering thrice ten thousand times,

Through various mortal forms the soul should pass.'--

* This is asserted in accordance with the doctrine of the

Platonists.

** This 30,000 times must not be considered mathematically;

since it symbolically indicates a certain appropriate

measure of perfection. For in units S is a perfect number,

as having a beginning, middle, and end. And again, 10 is

perfect, because it comprehends all numbers in itself.

These numbers, however, were call-...

{40}

This being the case, it is requisite to believe that men are committed

to the care of certain inspective guardians of this prison the body.

"That to the least of things, however, are allotted guardian powers,

may be learnt from the Egyptians, who say that the human body is divided

into thirty-six parts, and that daemons* or certain etherial gods who are

distributed into the same number of parts, are the guardians of these

divisions of the body. Some also assert, that there is a much greater

number of these presiding powers; different corporeal parts being under

the inspection of different powers. The names of these also in the

vernacular tongue of the Egyptians are Chnoumen, Chnachoumen, Knat,

Sicat, Biou, Erou, Erebiou, Ramanor, Reianoor. What, therefore, should

prevent him from making use of these and other powers, who wishes

rather to be well than to be ill, to be fortunate rather than to be

unfortunate, and to be liberated from such

...ed by the ancients perfect, in a different way from 6, 28,

&c.; for these were thus denominated because they are equal

to the sum of their parts.

* i. e. beneficent daemonss; for the ancients divided

daemonss into the beneficent and malevolent. They also

considered the former as assisting the soul in its ascent to

its pristine state of felicity; but the latter as of a

punishing and avenging characteristic.

{41}

tormentors and castigators as these things are thought to be?*

"He, however, who invokes these powers ought to be careful, lest being

conglutinated [as it were] to the worship of them, and to a love of

the body, he should turn from and become oblivious of more excellent

natures. For it is perhaps requisite not to disbelieve in wise men, who

say that the greater part of circumterrestrial daemons are conglutinated

to generation, and are delighted with blood, with the odour and vapour

of flesh, with melodies and with other things of the like kind**; to

which being bound, they are unable to effect any thing superior to the

sanction of the body, and the prediction of future events to men and

cities. Whatever also pertains to mortal actions they know, and are able

to bring to pass.

"If some one should command a worshiper of God either to act impiously,

or to say any thing of a most disgraceful nature, he is in no respect

whatever to be obeyed; but all trial and every kind of death are to be

endured rather than to meditate,

* Vid. Salmas. In fine libri He Annis climactericis.

** See Book II. of Taylor's translation of Porphyry,--On

Abstinence from Animal Food.

{42}

and much more to assert, any thing impious concerning God. But if any

one should order us to celebrate the Sun or Minerva, we ought most

gladly to sing hymns to their praise. For thus you will appear to

venerate the supreme God in a greater degree *, if you also celebrate

these powers: for piety when it passes through all things becomes more

perfect."

EXTRACTS FROM, AND INFORMATION RELATIVE TO, THE TREATISE OF PORPHYRY

AGAINST THE CHRISTIANS

[Illustration: Porphyry]

This work of Porphyry consisted of Fifteen Books, and is unfortunately

lost. It is frequently mentioned by the Fathers of the Church, from

whose writings the following particulars are collected.

The First Book appears to have contained a development of the

contrariety of the Scriptures, and proofs that they did not proceed from

Divinity, but from men. To this end Porphyry especially adduces what

Paul writes to the Galatians, chap. ii.

* For as the ineffable principle of things possesses all

power and the highest power, he first produced from himself

beings most transcendently allied to himself; and therefore,

by venerating these, the highest God will be in a greater

degree venerated, as being a greater veneration of his

power.

{43}

viz. that "when Peter came to Antioch, he withstood him to his face,

because he was to be blamed." Hence Porphyry infers, "that the Apostles,

and indeed the chief of them, did not publicly study the salvation

of all men, but that each of them was privately attentive to his own

renown." This the Fathers testify in more than one place. See the

Commentary of Jerome on the above-mentioned Epistle. Jerome also, in his

89th Epistle to Augustin, informs us that Porphyry says, "that Peter and

Paul opposed each other in a puerile contest, and that Paul was envious

of the virtue of Peter."

The Third Book treated of the interpretation of the Scriptures, in

which Porphyry condemned the mode of explaining them adopted by the

commentators, and especially the allegories of Origen. This is evident

from a long extract from this work of Porphyry given by Eusebius in

Hist. Eccl. lib. i. cap. 13.

The Fourth Book treated of the Mosaic history and the antiquities of the

Jews, as we learn from Eusebius, Proep. Evang. lib. i. cap. 9, and from

Theo-doret, Serm. ii. Therap.

But the Twelfth Book was the most celebrated of all, in which Porphyry

strenuously opposes the

{44}

prophecy of Daniel. Of this work Jerome thus speaks in the Preface to

his Commentary on that prophet: "Porphyry's twelfth book is against the

prophet Daniel, as he was unwilling to admit that it was written by that

prophet, but contends that it was composed by a person in Judaea named

Epiphanes, and who lived in the time of Antiochus. Hence he says,

that Daniel does not so much narrate future as past events. Lastly, he

asserts, that whatever is related as far as to the reign of Antiochus

contains a true history; but that all that is said posterior to this

time, as the writer was ignorant of futurity, is false."

The Thirteenth Book also, according to Jerome*, was written against

the same prophet; in which book, speaking of the "abomination of

desolation," as it is called by Daniel, (when standing in the sacred

place,) he says many reproachful things of the Christians.

The same Jerome likewise, in Epist. ci., ad Pam-machium, testifies, that

Porphyry accuses the history of the Evangelists of falsehood, and says**

that Christ, after he had told his brethren that he should

* Vid. lib. iv. Comment, in 24 Cap. Matth.

** Lib. ii. adversus Pelagianos.

{45}

not go up to the feast of tabernacles, yet afterwards went up to it

(John vii.). Hence Porphyry accuses him of inconstancy and mutability.

Jerome's observation on this is curious, viz. "Nesciens omnia scandala

ad carnem esse referenda."

Jerome adds (in Lib. Quasst. Hebraic, in Genesin) "that Porphyry

calumniates the Evangelists for making a miracle to the ignorant, by

asserting that Christ walked on the sea, calling the lake Genezareth

the sea." He likewise says, that Porphyry called the miracles which

were performed at the sepulchres of the martyrs, "the delusions of evil

demons."

The following remarkable passage from one of the lost writings of

Porphyry relative to the Christians, is preserved by Augustin in his

Treatise De Civit. lib. xix. cap. 23.

"Sunt spiritus terreni minimi loco terreno quodam malorum daemonum

potestati subjecti. Ab his sapientes Hebraeorum, quorum unus iste etiam

Jesus fuit, sicut audivisti divina Apollonis oracula quae superius dicta

sunt. Ab his ergo _Hebaei_ dsemonibus pessimis et minoribus spiritibus

vetabant religiosos, et ipsis vacare prohibebant: venerari autem magis

coelestes Deos, amplius autem venerari Deum patrem. Hoc autem et Dii

praecipiunt, et in

{40}

superioibus ostendimus, quemadmodum animadvertere ad Deum monent, et

ilium colere ubique imperant. Verum indocti et impiae naturae, quibus

vere Fatum non concessit a Dius dona obtinere, neque habere Jovis

immortalis notitiam, non audientes Deos et divinos viros; Deos quidem

omnes recusaverunt, prohibitos autem daemones non solum nullis odiis

insequi, sed etiam revereri delegerunt. Deum autem simulantes se colere,

ea sola per quae Deus adoratur, non agunt. Nam Deus quidem utpote omnium

pater nullius indiget: sed nobis est bene, cum eum per justitiam et

castitatem, aliasque virtutes adoramus, ipsam vitam precem ad ipsum

fa-cientes, per imitationem et inquisitionem de ipso. Inquisitio enim

purgat, imitatio deificat affectionem ad ipsum operando."

i. e. "There are terrene spirits of the lowest order, who in a certain

terrene place are subject to the power of evil demons. From these were

derived the wise men of the Hebrews, of whom Jesus also was one; as you

have heard the divine oracles of Apollo above mentioned assert. From

these worst of demons therefore, and lesser spirits of the _Hebrew_,

the oracles forbid the religious, and prohibit from paying attention to

them, but exhort them rather to venerate the celestial gods, and still

more the father of the gods. And we have above

{47}

shown how the gods admonish us to look to Divinity, and everywhere

command us to worship him. But the unlearned and impious natures, to

whom Fate has not granted truly to obtain gifts from the gods, and to

have a knowledge of immortal Jupiter,--these not attending to the gods

and divine men, reject indeed all the gods, and are so far from hating

prohibited demons, that they even choose to reverence them*. But

pretending that they worship God, they do not perform those things

through which alone God is adored. For God, indeed, as being the father

of all things, is not in want of any thing; but it is well with us when

we adore him through justice and continence, and the other

*The Platonic philosopher Sallust, in his golden book On the

Gods and the World, says, alluding to the Christians, cap.

18, "Impiety, which invades some places of the earth, and

which will often subsist in future, ought not to give any

disturbance to the worthy mind; for things of this kind do

not affect, nor can religious honours be of any advantage to

the gods; and the soul from its middle nature is not always

able to pursue that which is right Besides, it is not

improbable that impiety is a species of punishment; for

those who have known and at the same time despised the gods,

we may reasonably suppose will in another life be deprived

of the knowledge of their nature. And those who have

honoured their proper sovereigns as gods, shall be cut off

from the divinities, as the punishment of their impiety."

{48}

virtues, making our life a prayer to him through the imitation and

investigation of him. For investigation purifies, but imitation deifies

the affection of the mind by energizing about divinity."

The following extract from Porphyry concerning a pestilence which raged

for many years at Rome, and could not be mitigated by any sacrifices, is

preserved by Theodoret: "[--------]." i. e. "The Christians now wonder

that the city has been for so many years attacked by disease, the advent

[or manifest appearance] of Esculapius and the other gods no longer

existing. For Jesus being now reverenced and worshiped, no one any

longer derives any public benefit from the gods."

Arguments of Celsus, Porphyry, and the Emperor Julian, Against the Christians Also Extracts from Diodorus Siculus, Josephus, and Tacitus, Relating to the Jews, Together with an Appendix · 第 11 / 21 题