Arguments Of Celsus, Porphyry, And The Emperor Julian, Against The Christians Part 2

"The disciples of Jesus, not being able to adduce any thing respecting him that was obviously manifest, falsely a.s.sert 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 a.s.sert 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 a.s.sertions, that he had a foreknowledge of all things.

"These things Jesus said after he had previously declared that he was G.o.d, and it was entirely necessary that what he had predicted should take place. He therefore, though a G.o.d, 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 a.s.sociates. No one likewise would think of betraying the man, of whose table he had been a partaker. But here the a.s.sociate of the table of G.o.d became treacherous to him; G.o.d 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 a.s.serted 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 ign.o.ble arguments, that Christ is the son of G.o.d.

"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 G.o.d*. But the Christians argue sophistically, when they say that the son of G.o.d 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 G.o.d, was not a pure and holy _word_, but a man who was most disgracefully punished and put to death.

"What ill.u.s.trious deed did Jesus accomplish worthy of a G.o.d, 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 G.o.d.

{12}

who had insulted both him and his father? What kind of ichor 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 G.o.d, 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 G.o.d] 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 G.o.d; for he predicted to his a.s.sociates 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 G.o.d, because he cured the lame and the blind, and, as you a.s.sert, 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 G.o.d, 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 a.s.sistance 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 a.s.sociates?

"If also Christ wished to be concealed, why was a voice heard from heaven, proclaiming him to be the son of G.o.d? 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 G.o.d that ever appeared to men, did not procure belief that he was a G.o.d, 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 G.o.d 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 a.s.s*. 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 a.s.s, 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 mult.i.tude, 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