A True Discourse

Celsus

(Early Second Century)

Date: "And we have heard that there were two individuals of the name of Celsus, both of whom were Epicureans; the earlier of the two having lived in the time of Nero, but this one in that of Adrian, and later." (Origen, Against Celsus, Book 1, Chapter 8)

[Celsus' 'A True Discourse' is a lost work, but fragments survive in Origen's 'Contra Celsum,' which are here collected. Origen returns to the same remarks of Celsus, but also accuses Celsus of repeating himself; so I have consolidated some doublets, retained others, and edited the whole for smoothness and consistency of voice.]

Secret Society

Of associations some are public, and these are in accordance with the laws; others, again, secret, and maintained in violation of the laws; of this latter sort is Christianity. The Christians teach and practice their favorite doctrines in secret. They do this to some purpose, seeing they escape the penalty of death which is imminent; similar dangers were encountered by such men as Socrates for the sake of philosophy. Their “love-feasts“ had their origin in the common danger, and are more binding than any oaths.

The system of doctrine, viz., Judaism, upon which Christianity depends, was barbarous in its origin; in this case as in others, the Greeks are more skillful than any others in judging, establishing, and reducing to practice the discoveries of barbarous nations.

Their system of morals is only common to them with other philosophers, and no venerable or new branch of instruction, though their regulations respecting idolatry are peculiar to themselves. The Christians do not consider those to be gods that are made with hands, on the ground that it is not in conformity with right reason to suppose that images, fashioned by the most worthless and depraved of workmen, and in many instances also provided by wicked men, can be regarded as gods. That even this is a common opinion, and one not first discovered by Christianity, is shown by a saying of Heraclitus to this effect: “Those who draw near to lifeless images, as if they were gods, act in a similar manner to those who would enter into conversation with houses.” The Persians also were of the same opinion, according to Herodotus.

It is by the names of certain demons, and by the use of incantations, that the Christians appear to be possessed of miraculous power. And it was by means of sorcery that Jesus was able to accomplish the wonders which he performed; and foreseeing that others would attain the same knowledge, and do the same things, making a boast of doing them by help of the power of God, he excludes such from his kingdom. If they are justly excluded, while he himself is guilty of the same practices, he is a wicked man; but if he is not guilty of wickedness in doing such things, neither are they who do the same as he.

And I do not maintain that if a man, who has adopted a system of good doctrine, is to incur danger from men on that account, he should either apostatize, or feign apostasy, or openly deny his opinions. There is something better in man than the earthly part of his nature, which is akin to God. They in whom this element, viz., the soul, is in a healthy condition, are ever seeking after their kindred nature, meaning God, and are ever desiring to hear something about him, and to call it to remembrance. The man who has embraced a system of good doctrine ought not, even if exposed to danger on that account from men, to disavow it and feign recantation, or pretend that he had done so, nor yet openly and publicly disown it.

Blind Faith

In adopting opinions we should follow reason and a rational guide, since he who assents to opinions without following this course is very liable to be deceived. Inconsiderate Christians are like those who fall in with the Metragyrtae, and soothsayers, and Mithrae, and Sabbadians, and to anything else that one may fall in with, and to the phantoms of Hecate, or any other demon or demons. For as amongst such persons are frequently to be found wicked men, who, taking advantage of the ignorance of those who are easily deceived, lead them away whither they will, so also is the case among Christians. Certain persons who do not wish either to give or receive a reason for their belief, keep repeating, “Do not examine, but believe!” and, “Your faith will save you!” Such also say, “The wisdom of this life is a bad thing, but foolishness is a good thing!”

If they would answer me, not as if I were asking for information, for I am acquainted with all their opinions, but because I take an equal interest in them all, it would be well. And if they will not, but will keep reiterating, as they generally do, ’Do not investigate,’ etc., they must explain to me at least of what nature these things are of which they speak, and whence they are derived.

There is to be found among many nations a general relationship of doctrine, as among the Egyptians, and Assyrians, and Indians, and Persians, and Odrysians, and Samothracians, and Eleusinians and Hyperboreans. There is an authoritative account from the very beginning, respecting which there is a constant agreement among all the most learned nations, and cities, and men. From which of these ancient and learned nations will the Jews find a concurring opinion?—from the Galactophagi of Homer, and the Druids of the Gauls, and the Getae? Ancient and learned men have conferred benefits upon their contemporaries by their deeds, and upon posterity by their writings; Linus, Musaeus, and Orpheus, and Pherecydes, and the Persian Zoroaster, and Pythagoras, discussed these topics, and their opinions were deposited in books, and have thus been preserved down to the present time.

There have been, from all eternity, many conflagrations and many cataclysms and many deluges. The flood which occurred in the time of Deucalion, and the conflagration in that of Phaethon, were comparatively modern and more recent than any others. The Greeks consider those things as ancient, because, owing to the deluges and conflagrations, they have not beheld or received any memorials of older events. So those persons testify who are the most learned of the Egyptians.

Moses having learned the doctrine which is to be found existing among wise nations and eloquent men, obtained the reputation of divinity. Circumcision as practiced by the Jews was derived from the Egyptians. Those herdsmen and shepherds who followed Moses as their leader, had their minds deluded by vulgar deceits, and so concluded that there was but one God, named either the Highest, or Adonai, or the Heavenly, or Sabaoth, or called by some other of those names which they delight to give this world; and they knew nothing beyond that. The more impartial interpreters devise a tropical and allegorical signification for the Mosaic history.

The Jews worship angels, and are addicted to sorcery, in which Moses was their instructor. I will show afterwards how it was through ignorance that the Jews were deceived and led into error. Jesus is the leader of their generation, in so far as they are Christians, and a few years ago he began to teach this doctrine, being regarded by Christians as the son of God. Their converts were deceived; this doctrine is vulgar, and on account of its vulgarity and its want of reasoning power, obtained a hold only over the ignorant. It was, however, not the simple alone who were led by the doctrine of Jesus to adopt his religion; there were amongst them some persons of moderate intelligence, and gentle disposition, and possessed of understanding, and capable of comprehending allegories.

The Address of the Jew

(Jews and Christians seek to ascertain from those prophecies which they believe in common, whether he who was foretold has come, or has not yet arrived, and is still an object of expectation. Unwilling to intrude into family quarrels not my own, permit me to introduce a Jew, who has not abandoned his ancestral customs, to carry on the discussion with Jesus.)

“You, sir, have invented your birth from a virgin! You, Jesus, were born in a certain Jewish village, of a poor woman of the country, who gained her subsistence by spinning. When she was pregnant she was turned out of doors by the carpenter to whom she had been betrothed, as having been convicted as guilty of adultery, and she bore a child to a certain soldier named Panthera. After being driven away by her husband, and wandering about for a time, she disgracefully gave birth to Jesus, who, brought up as an illegitimate child, having hired himself out as a servant in Egypt on account of his poverty, and having there acquired the knowledge of certain miraculous powers, on which the Egyptians greatly pride themselves, returned to his own country, highly elated on account of them, and by means of those powers proclaimed himself a god.

“How does the fiction of his birth from a virgin differ from the Greek fables about Danae, and Melanippe, and Auge, and Antiope? If the mother of Jesus was beautiful, then the god whose nature is not to love a corruptible body, had intercourse with her because she was beautiful. It was improbable that the god would entertain a passion for her, because she was neither rich nor of royal rank, seeing no one even of her neighbors knew her. When hated by her husband, and turned out of doors, she was not saved by divine power, nor was her story believed. Such things have no connection with the kingdom of heaven. The prediction that our Lord was to come into the world, and the account of the star, and of the wise men who came from the east to worship the child, are fictions [Matthew 2:1].

“When you, Jesus, were bathing beside John, you say that what had the appearance of a bird from the air alighted upon you. [Matthew 3:16.] What credible witness beheld this appearance? or who heard a voice from heaven declaring you to be the son of God? What proof is there of it, save your own assertion, and the statement of another of those individuals who have been punished along with you? This is your own testimony, unsupported save by one of those who were sharers of your punishment, whom you adduce.

“But my prophet once declared in Jerusalem, that the son of God will come as the Judge of the righteous and the Punisher of the wicked. Why should it be you alone, rather than innumerable others, who existed after the prophecies were published, to whom these predictions are applicable? Some, carried away by enthusiasm, and others having gathered a multitude of followers, give out that the son of God is come down from heaven. The prophecies referred to the events of your life may also suit other events as well. If you, Jesus, say that every man, born according to the decree of Divine Providence, is a son of God, in what respect should you differ from another? Countless individuals will convict you of falsehood, alleging that those predictions which were spoken of the son of God were intended of them.

“Chaldeans are spoken of by Jesus as having been induced to come to him at his birth, and to worship him while yet an infant as a god, and to have made this known to Herod the tetrarch. Herod sent and slew all the infants that had been born about the same time, thinking that in this way he would ensure his death among the others; and he was led to do this through fear that, if Jesus lived to a sufficient age, he would obtain the throne. [Matthew 2:16.] But if, then, this was done in order that you might not reign in his stead when you had grown to man’s estate; why, after you did reach that estate, did you not become a king? Why instead do you, the son of God, wander about in so mean a condition, hiding yourself through fear, and leading a miserable life up and down? Jesus having gathered around him ten or eleven persons of notorious character, the very wickedest of tax-gatherers and sailors, fled in company with them from place to place, and obtained his living in a shameful and importunate manner. In company with your disciples you go and hide yourself in different places!

“You went about with your disciples, and obtained your livelihood in a disgraceful and importunate manner. What need, moreover, was there that you, while still an infant, should be conveyed into Egypt? [Matthew 2:21.] Was it to escape being murdered? But then it was not likely that a god should be afraid of death; and yet an angel came down from heaven, commanding you and your friends to flee, lest you should be captured and put to death! And was not the great God, who had already sent two angels on your account, able to keep you, his only son, there in safety?

“The old mythological fables, which attributed a divine origin to Perseus, and Amphion, and Aeacus, and Minos, were not believed by us Jews. Nevertheless, that they might not appear unworthy of credit, they represented the deeds of these personages as great and wonderful, and truly beyond the power of man; but what have you done that is noble or wonderful either in deed or in word? You have made no manifestation to us, although they challenged you in the temple to exhibit some unmistakeable sign that you were the son of God.

“As to those statements which are made regarding your cures, or your resurrection, or the feeding of a multitude with a few loaves, from which many fragments remained over, or those other stories which the disciples have recorded as of a marvellous nature:—Well, let us believe that these were actually wrought by you. How do they differ from the tricks of jugglers, who profess to do more wonderful things, and from the feats performed by those who have been taught by Egyptians, who in the middle of the market-place, in return for a few obols, will impart the knowledge of their most venerated arts, and will expel demons from men, and dispel diseases, and invoke the souls of heroes, and exhibit expensive banquets, and tables, and dishes, and dainties having no real existence, and who will put in motion, as if alive, what are not really living animals, but which have only the appearance of life? Since, then, these persons can perform such feats, shall we of necessity conclude that they are ‘sons of God,’ or must we admit that these are the proceedings of wicked men under the influence of an evil spirit?

“Such a body as yours could not have belonged to God, because the body of god would not have been so generated as you, O Jesus, were. The body of a god is not nourished with such food as was that of Jesus. The blood of Jesus which was shed upon the cross was not ichor, such as flows in the veins of the blessed gods. But the body of a god does not make use of such a voice as that of Jesus, nor employ such a method of persuasion as he. These tenets of his were those of a wicked and God-hated sorcerer.”

(Thus ends the Jew's address to Jesus.)

---

(Let us proceed with the Jew's second address, to those who have been converted from Judaism to Christianity.)

“You have forsaken the law of your fathers, in consequence of your minds being led captive by Jesus. You have been most ridiculously deceived, and have become deserters to another name and to another mode of life. What induced you, my fellow-citizens, to abandon the law of your fathers, and to allow your minds to be led captive by him with whom we have just conversed, and thus be most ridiculously deluded, so as to become deserters from us to another name, and to the practices of another life? Certain among you have abandoned the usages of our fathers under a pretense of explanations and allegories; and some of you, although, as you pretend, interpreting them in a spiritual manner, nevertheless do observe the customs of our fathers; and some of you, without any such interpretation, are willing to accept Jesus as the subject of prophecy, and to keep the law of Moses according to the customs of the fathers, as having in the words the whole mind of the Spirit. Yesterday and the day before, when we visited with punishment the man who deluded you, you became apostates from the law of your fathers. How is it that you take the beginning of your system from our worship, and when you have made some progress you treat it with disrespect, although you have no other foundation to show for your doctrines than our law?

“If any one predicted to us that the son of God was to visit mankind, he was one of our prophets, and the prophet of our God. John, who baptized Jesus, was a Jew; Jesus was punished by the Jews for his crimes. Your doctrine regarding the resurrection of the dead, and the divine judgment, and of the rewards to be bestowed upon the just, and of the fire which is to devour the wicked, are stale opinions, and there is nothing new in your teaching upon these points. Jesus observed all the Jewish usages, including even our sacrificial observances.

“Language dictated by arrogance proceeds from Jesus. He uttered great and small falsehoods; he made promises which he did not perform. Many other persons would appear such as Jesus was, to those who were willing to be deceived. The charge brought against the Jews by the Christian converts is that they have not believed in Jesus as in God. How should we, who have made known to all men that there is to come from God one who is to punish the wicked, treat him with disregard when he came? Why did we treat him, whom we announced beforehand, with dishonor? Was it that we might be chastised more than others?

“How should we deem him to be a god, who not only in other respects, as was currently reported, performed none of his promises, but who also, after we had convicted him, and condemned him as deserving of the punishment of death, was found attempting to conceal himself, and endeavoring to escape in a most disgraceful manner, and who was betrayed by those whom he called disciples? And yet, he who was a god could neither flee nor be led away a prisoner; and least of all could he be deserted and delivered up by those who had been his associates, whom he called his disciples, and had shared all things in common, and had had him for their teacher, who was deemed to be a Savior, and a son of the greatest God, and an angel.

“No good general and leader of great multitudes was ever betrayed, nor even a wicked captain of robbers and commander of very wicked men, who seemed to be of any use to his associates; but Jesus, having been betrayed by his subordinates, neither governed like a good general, nor, after deceiving his disciples, produced in the minds of the victims of his deceit that feeling of good-will which, so to speak, would be manifested towards a brigand chief.

“Although I could state many things regarding the events of the life of Jesus which are true, and not like those which are recorded by the disciples, I willingly omit them. The disciples of Jesus, having no undoubted fact on which to rely, devised the fiction that he foreknew everything before it happened. The disciples of Jesus wrote such accounts regarding him, by way of extenuating the charges that told against him: as if any one were to say that a certain person was a just man, and yet were to show that he was guilty of injustice; or that he was pious, and yet had committed murder; or that he was immortal, and yet was dead; subjoining to all these statements the remark that he had foretold all these things.

“For you do not even allege this, that he seemed to wicked men to suffer this punishment, though not undergoing it in reality; but, on the contrary, you acknowledge that he openly suffered. How is it credible that Jesus could have predicted these things? How could the dead man be immortal? What god, or spirit, or prudent man would not, on foreseeing that such events were to befall him, avoid them if he could; whereas he threw himself headlong into those things which he knew beforehand were to happen?

“How is it that, if Jesus pointed out beforehand both the traitor and the perjurer, they did not fear him as a god, and cease, the one from his intended treason, and the other from his perjury? But these persons betrayed and denied him without manifesting any concern about him. It is always the case that, when a man against whom a plot is formed comes to the knowledge of it and makes known to the conspirators that he is acquainted with their design, the latter are turned from their purpose, and keep upon their guard.

“Not because these things were predicted did they come to pass, for that is impossible; but since they have come to pass, their being predicted is shown to be a falsehood: for it is altogether impossible that those who heard beforehand of the discovery of their designs, should carry out their plans of betrayal and denial. These events he predicted as being a god, and the prediction must by all means come to pass. God, therefore, who above all others ought to do good to men, and especially to those of his own household, led on his own disciples and prophets, with whom he was in the habit of eating and drinking, to such a degree of wickedness, that they became impious and unholy men. Now, of a truth, he who shared a man’s table would not be guilty of conspiring against him; but after banqueting with God, he became a conspirator. [John 13:18.] And, what is still more absurd, God himself plotted against the members of his own table, by converting them into traitors and villains!

“He who was partaker of a man’s table would not conspire against him; and if he would not conspire against a man, much less would he plot against a god after banqueting with him. And, which is still more absurd, God himself conspired against those who sat at his table, by converting them into traitors and impious men. If he had determined upon these things, and underwent chastisement in obedience to his Father, it is manifest that, being a god, and submitting voluntarily, those things that were done agreeably to his own decision were neither painful nor distressing. So why does he mourn, and lament, and pray to escape the fear of death, expressing himself in terms like these: ‘O Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me?’ [Matthew 26:39.] He says, ‘O Father, would that this cup might pass from me,’ though nothing at that time was done to Jesus which was either painful or distressing. Even although guilty of falsehood, you have not been able to give a color of credibility to your inventions.

“Certain of the Christian believers, like persons who in a fit of drunkenness lay violent hands upon themselves, have corrupted the Gospel from its original integrity, to a threefold, and fourfold, and many-fold degree, and have remodelled it, so that they might be able to answer objections. Christians make use of the prophets, who predicted the events of Christ’s life; hoping to spare individuals, and to expound the prophecies themselves, I admit the plausibility of the Christian interpretation of them. Nevertheless the use which they make of them may be overturned. One ought not hastily to assume so important a position on small grounds. The prophecies may be applied to countless other things with greater probability than to Jesus.

“The prophets declare the coming one to be a mighty potentate, Lord of all nations and armies. Nor did the prophets predict such a pestilence. From such signs and misinterpretations, and from proofs so mean, no one could prove him to be God, and the son of God. For as the sun, which enlightens all other objects, first makes himself visible, so ought the son of God to have done. The Christians are guilty of sophistical reasoning, in saying that the son of God is the Logos Himself. When they declare the Logos to be the son of God [John 1:1], they do not present to view a pure and holy Logos, but a most degraded man, who was punished by scourging and crucifixion. If your Logos is the son of God, we also give our assent to the same; yet the prophecies agree with ten thousand other things more credibly than with Jesus.

“The framers of the genealogies, from a feeling of pride, made Jesus to be descended from the first man, and from the kings of the Jews. The carpenter’s wife could not have been ignorant of the fact, had she been of such illustrious descent. But what great deeds did Jesus perform as being a god? Did he put his enemies to shame, or bring to a ridiculous conclusion what was designed against him? In the Bacchae of Euripides, Dionysus says:—

“The divinity himself will liberate me whenever I wish.”

“But no calamity happened even to him who condemned him, as there did to Pentheus, viz., madness or deception; neither to those who mocked Jesus, and put on him the purple robe, and the crown of thorns, and placed the reed in his hand. If not before, yet why now, at least, does he not give some manifestation of his divinity, and free himself from this reproach, and take vengeance upon those who insult both him and his Father? What is the nature of the ichor in the body of the crucified Jesus? Is it such as flows in the bodies of the immortal gods?

“He rushed with open mouth to drink of the vinegar and the gall, and could not endure his thirst as any ordinary man frequently endures it. You, O sincere believers, find fault with us, because we do not recognize this individual as God, nor agree with you that he endured these sufferings for the benefit of mankind, in order that we also might despise punishment. You blame us, moreover, because we did not believe in him, but asserted that he cast out demons from the souls of men through Beelzebub the prince of the demons [Matthew 12:24, Luke 11:15]; and you blame us because we disparage him as leading the wandering life of a vagabond, and passing an anxious existence in a disgraceful body.

“Jesus, having gained over no one during his life, not even his own disciples, underwent these punishments and sufferings. Jesus did not show himself to be pure from all evil, nor was he irreproachable. You will not, I suppose, say of him, that, after failing to gain over those who were in this world, he went to Hades to gain over those who were there. If, after inventing defenses which are absurd, and by which you were ridiculously deluded, you imagine that you really make a good defense, what prevents you from regarding those other individuals who have been condemned, and have died a miserable death, as greater and more divine messengers of heaven than Jesus? Any similarly shameless fellow might be able to say regarding even a robber and murderer whom punishment had overtaken, that such an one was not a robber, but a god, because he predicted to his fellow-robbers that he would suffer such punishment as he actually did suffer.

“In the next place, those who were his associates while alive, and who listened to his voice, and enjoyed his instructions as their teacher, on seeing him subjected to punishment and death, neither died with him, nor for him, nor were even induced to regard punishment with contempt, but denied even that they were his disciples, whereas now you die along with him. Jesus, when on earth, gained over to himself only ten sailors and tax-gatherers of the most worthless character, and not even the whole of these. Is it not the height of absurdity to maintain, that if, while he himself was alive, he won over not a single person to his views, after his death any who wish are able to gain over such a multitude of individuals?

“By what train of argument were they led to regard him as the son of God? They answer that they were won over to him, because they know that his punishment was undergone to bring about the destruction of the father of evil. What then? Have not many others, too, been punished, and that not less disgracefully? They deem Jesus to be the son of God, because he healed the lame and the blind; moreover, as they assert, he raised the dead.

“But, O light and truth! Jesus with his own voice expressly and distinctly declares, as you yourselves have recorded, that there will come to you even others, employing miracles of a similar kind [Matthew 24:24], who are wicked men, and sorcerers; and he calls him who makes use of such devices, one Satan. So Jesus himself does not deny that these works at least are not at all divine, but proceed from wicked men; and being compelled by the force of truth, he at the same time not only laid open the doings of others, but convicted himself of the same acts. Is it not, then, a miserable inference, to conclude from the same works that the one is God and the other sorcerers? Why ought the others, because of these acts, to be accounted wicked rather than this man, seeing they have him as their witness against himself? For he has himself acknowledged that these are not the works of a divine nature, but the inventions of certain deceivers, and of thoroughly wicked men.

“He says, that it is a certain Satan who contrives such devices; when he says, ‘there will appear among you others also, who will perform miracles like mine,’ and he terms him who devises such things, one Satan, even he himself does not deny that these works have in them nothing of divinity, but are the acts of wicked men. Being compelled by the force of truth, Jesus at the same time both exposed the doings of others, and convicted himself of the same. Is it not a wretched inference from the same acts, to conclude that the one is a god, and the others sorcerers? Why from these works should the others be accounted wicked, rather than this man, seeing they have him as a witness against himself? He himself acknowledged that these were not the works of a divine nature, but were the inventions of certain deceivers, and of very wicked men. By what, then, were you induced to become his followers? Was it because he foretold that after his death he would rise again?

“Come now, let us grant to you that the prediction was actually uttered. Yet how many others are there who practice such juggling tricks, in order to deceive their simple hearers, and who make gain by their deception?—as was the case, they say, with Zamolxis in Scythia, the slave of Pythagoras; and with Pythagoras himself in Italy; and with Rhampsinitus in Egypt (the latter of whom, they say, played at dice with Demeter in Hades, and returned to the upper world with a golden napkin which he had received from her as a gift); and also with Orpheus among the Odrysians, and Protesilaus in Thessaly, and Hercules at Cape Taenarus, and Theseus. But the question is, whether any one who was really dead ever rose with a veritable body. Or do you imagine the statements of others not only to be myths, but to have the appearance of such, while you have discovered a becoming and credible termination to your drama in the voice from the cross, when he breathed his last, and in the earthquake [Matthew 27:51] and the darkness? That while alive he was of no assistance to himself, but that when dead he rose again, and exhibited the marks of his punishment, and showed how his hands were pierced with nails [John 20:27]: who beheld this? A half-frantic woman, as you state, and some one else, perhaps, of those who were engaged in the same system of delusion, who had either dreamed so, owing to a peculiar state of mind, or under the influence of a perverted and wandering imagination had formed to himself an appearance according to his own wishes, as he himself desired, which has been the case with numberless individuals; or, which is most probable, one who desired to impress others with this portent, and by such a falsehood to furnish an occasion to impostors like himself. Jesus accordingly exhibited after His death only the appearance of wounds received on the cross, and was not in reality so wounded as he is described to have been.

“If Jesus had really wished to manifest his divine power, he ought to have shown himself to those who ill-treated him, and to the judge who condemned him, and to all men universally, without reservation. For he had no longer occasion to fear any man after his death, being, as you say, a god; nor was he sent into the world at all for the purpose of being hid. If this at least would have helped to manifest his divinity, he ought accordingly to have at once disappeared from the cross. And who that is sent as a messenger ever conceals himself when he ought to make known his message? While he was in the body, and no one believed upon him, he preached to all without intermission; but when he might have produced a powerful belief in himself after rising from the dead, he showed himself secretly only to one half-mad woman, and to his own boon companions. While undergoing his punishment he was seen by all men, but after his resurrection by one, whereas the opposite ought to have happened.

“He is one who will lead the pious to the light, and who will have mercy on others, whether they sin or repent. If he wished to remain hid, why was there heard a voice from heaven proclaiming him to be the son of God? And if he did not seek to remain concealed, why was he punished? or why did he die? Why was he punished, if he wished to remain hid? If he had wished, by the punishments which he underwent, to teach us also to despise death, then after his resurrection he should have openly summoned all men to the light, and instructed them in the object of his coming. All these statements are taken from your own books, in addition to which we need no other witness; for you fall upon your own swords.

“O most high and heavenly one! what God, on appearing to men, is received with incredulity? What God that appeared among men is received with incredulity, and that, too, when appearing to those who expect him? or why, pray, is he not recognized by those who have been long looking for him? Jesus makes use of threats, and reviles men on light grounds, when he says, ‘Woe unto you,’ and ‘I tell you beforehand.’ For by such expressions he manifestly acknowledges his inability to persuade; and this would not be the case with a god, or even a prudent man.

“We certainly hope that there will be a bodily resurrection, and that we shall enjoy an eternal life; and the example and archetype of this will be him who is sent to us, and who will show that nothing is impossible with God. One prophet has predicted the advent of Christ; where, then, is he, that we may see him and believe upon him? Did Jesus come into the world for this purpose, that we should not believe him? He was therefore a man, and of such a nature, as the truth itself proves, and reason demonstrates him to be.”

(Thus ends the Discourse of the Jew.)

---

The Shadow of an Ass

The controversy between Jews and Christians is a most foolish one; the discussions which they have with each other regarding Christ differ in no respect from what is called in the proverb, ’a fight about the shadow of an ass.’ There is nothing of importance in the investigations of the Jews and Christians: for both believe that it was predicted by the Divine Spirit that one was to come as a Savior to the human race, but do not yet agree on the point whether the person predicted has actually come or not. The Jews suffered from the adherents of Jesus, who believed in him as the Christ, the same treatment which they had inflicted upon the Egyptians; and the cause which led to the new state of things in either instance was rebellion against the state.

The Hebrews, being originally Egyptians, date the commencement of their political existence from the time of their rebellion, and in the days of Jesus others who were Jews rebelled against the Jewish state, and became his followers. A revolt was the original commencement of the ancient Jewish state, and subsequently of Christianity. If all men wished to become Christians, the latter would not desire such a result. The Hebrews departed from Egypt after revolting against the Egyptians, and proceeded to Palestine, and occupied the land now called Judea. Christians at first were few in number, and held the same opinions; but when they grew to be a great multitude, they were divided and separated, each wishing to have his own individual party: for this was their object from the beginning.

All the Christians were of one mind when, at the very beginning, believers were few in number. When Christians had greatly increased in numbers, they were split up into factions, each individual desiring to have his own party. Being thus separated through their numbers, they confute one another, still having, so to speak, one name in common, if indeed they still retain it. And this is the only thing which they are yet ashamed to abandon, while other matters are determined in different ways by the various sects.

Their union is the more wonderful, the more it can be shown to be based on no substantial reason; and yet rebellion is a substantial reason, as well as the advantages which accrue from it, and the fear of external enemies. Such are the causes which give stability to their faith. Concealing the nature of their origin, they impress upon the minds of their first converts a contempt for idols, and images of all kinds.

But what legends of every kind they gather together; what terrors they invent! They weave together erroneous opinions drawn from ancient sources, and trumpet them aloud, and sound them before men, as the priests of Cybele clash their cymbals in the ears of those who are being initiated in their mysteries. One may compare the articles of their faith to those of the Egyptians, among whom, as you approach their sacred edifices, are to be seen splendid enclosures, and groves, and large and beautiful gateways, and wonderful temples, and magnificent tents around them, and ceremonies of worship full of superstition and mystery; but when you have entered, and passed within, the object of worship is seen to be a cat, or an ape, or a crocodile, or a goat, or a dog!

The Egyptians assert that these animals are a sort of symbol of God, as their prophets are accustomed to call them; an impression is produced in the minds of those who have learned these things, that they have not been initiated in vain. The Christians repel every wise man from the doctrine of their faith, and invite only the ignorant and the vulgar; Christianity appears an object of veneration to men of the more servile class alone. They ridicule the Egyptians, although they present many by no means contemptible mysteries for our consideration, when they teach us that such rites are acts of worship offered to eternal ideas, and not, as the multitude think, to ephemeral animals. The Christians are silly, because they introduce nothing nobler than the goats and dogs of the Egyptian worship in their narratives about Jesus. The inner mysteries of the church of God are not superior to the cats, and apes, and crocodiles, and goats, and dogs of Egypt.

Aesculapius Appears Among Men

Miracles were performed in all countries, or at least in many of them. Aesculapius conferred benefits on many, and foretold future events to entire cities, which were dedicated to him, such as Tricca, and Epidaurus, and Cos, and Pergamus; and along with Aesculapius, Aristeas of Proconnesus, and a certain Clazomenian, and Cleomedes of Astypalaea. The Dioscuri, and Hercules, and Aesculapius, and Dionysus, are believed by the Greeks to have become gods after being men. But the Christians cannot bear to call such beings gods, because they were at first men, and yet they manifested many noble qualifies, which were displayed for the benefit of mankind, while they assert that Jesus was seen after His death by his own followers. He was seen indeed, but was only a shadow! Their Jesus after his death appeared only to the members of his own troop.

A great and incalculable multitude both of Greeks and Barbarians acknowledge that they have frequently seen, and still see, no mere phantom, but Aesculapius himself, healing and doing good, and foretelling the future. Then, with respect to Aristeas of Proconnesus, who disappeared from among men in a manner so indicative of divine intervention, and who showed himself again in so unmistakeable a fashion, and on many subsequent occasions visited many parts of the world, and announced marvellous events, and whom Apollo enjoined the inhabitants of Metapontium to regard as a god, no one considers him to be a god. Aristeas disappeared through the intervention of the divinity and made marvellous announcements; and, moreover, there was an oracle of Apollo, enjoining the Metapontines to treat Aristeas as a god. Nor does anyone regards Abaris the Hyperborean as a god, who was possessed of such power as to be borne along like an arrow from a bow.

Let us next examine the case of the Clazomenian. Do they not report that his soul frequently quitted his body, and flitted about in an incorporeal form? and yet men did not regard him as a god. I relate further what is told of Cleomedes of Astypalaea, who entered into an ark, and although shut up within it, was not found therein, but through some arrangement of the divinity, flew out, when certain persons had cut open the ark in order to apprehend him. And one might name many others of the same kind. In worshipping him who was taken prisoner and put to death, they are acting like the Getae who worship Zamolxis, and the Cilicians who worship Mopsus, and the Acarnanians who pay divine honors to Amphilochus, and like the Thebans who do the same to Amphiaraus, and the Lebadians to Trophonius. The Egyptians, having been taught to worship Antinous, the favorite of Adrian, will not endure his being compared with Apollo or Zeus, though the honor paid to him falls little short of that which the Christians render to Jesus.

Faith, having taken possession of their minds, makes them yield the assent which they give to the doctrine of Jesus; for of a truth it is faith which does produce such an assent. They regard this Jesus, who was but a mortal body, displaying all the infirmities and impurities belonging to the flesh, as a god, and suppose that they act piously in so doing. I would compare the mortal flesh of Jesus to gold, and silver, and stone; the former is more liable to corruption than the latter. Well, after he has laid aside these qualities, he will be a god: and if so, why not rather Aesculapius, and Dionysus, and Hercules? They ridicule those who worship Jupiter, because his tomb is pointed out in the island of Crete; and yet they worship him who rose from the tomb, although ignorant of the grounds on which the Cretans observe such a custom.

Some very few individuals who are considered Christians, of the more intelligent class, make objections against the doctrine of Jesus. Thus the following are the rules laid down by them:—Let no one come to us who has been instructed, or who is wise or prudent, for such qualifications are deemed evil by us; but if there be any ignorant, or unintelligent, or uninstructed, or foolish persons, let them come with confidence. By which words, acknowledging that such individuals are worthy of their god, they manifestly show that they desire and are able to gain over only the silly, and the mean, and the stupid. It is only foolish and low individuals, and persons devoid of perception, and slaves, and women, and children, of whom the teachers of the divine word wish to make converts.

For why is it an evil to have been educated, and to have studied the best opinions, and to have both the reality and appearance of wisdom? What hindrance does this offer to the knowledge of God? Why should education not rather be an assistance, and a means by which one might be better able to arrive at the truth? Moreover, it is an excellent thing for a man to be wise, but not to seem so. Nay, we see, indeed, that even those individuals, who in the market-places perform the most disgraceful tricks, and who collect crowds around them, would never approach an assembly of wise men, nor dare to exhibit their arts and show off their tricks before them; but wherever they see young men, and a mob of slaves, and a gathering of foolish and unintelligent persons, thither they thrust themselves in, and make a display, showing themselves off.

We see, indeed, in private houses workers in wool and leather, and fullers, and persons of the most uninstructed and rustic character, not venturing to utter a word in the presence of their elder and wiser masters; but when they get hold of the children privately, and certain women as ignorant as themselves, they pour forth wonderful statements, to the effect that they ought not to give heed to their father and to their teachers, but should obey them; that the former are foolish and stupid, and neither know nor can perform anything that is really good, being preoccupied with empty trifles; that they alone know how men ought to live, and that, if the children obey them, they will both be happy themselves, and will make their home happy also. And while thus speaking, if they see one of the instructors of youth approaching, or one of the more intelligent class, or even the father himself, the more timid among them become afraid, while the more forward incite the children to throw off the yoke, whispering that in the presence of father and teachers they neither will nor can explain to them any good thing, seeing they turn away with aversion from the silliness and stupidity of such persons as being altogether corrupt, and far advanced in wickedness, and such as would inflict punishment upon them; but that if they wish to avail themselves of their aid they must leave their father and their instructors, and go with the women and their play-fellows to the women’s apartments, or to the leather shop, or to the fuller’s shop, that they may attain to perfection;—and by words like these they gain them over.

These most rustic of mankind carefully incite young boys to wickedness, and women to forsake their fathers and teachers, and follow them, calling those teachers triflers and fools, who teach better things. That I bring no heavier charge than what the truth compels me, any one may see from the following remarks. Those who invite to participation in other mysteries, make proclamation as follows: ‘Every one who has clean hands, and a prudent tongue;’ others again thus: ‘He who is pure from all pollution, and whose soul is conscious of no evil, and who has lived well and justly.’ Such is the proclamation made by those who promise purification from sins. But let us hear what kind of persons these Christians invite. Every one, they say, who is a sinner, who is devoid of understanding, who is a child, and, to speak generally, whoever is unfortunate, him will the kingdom of God receive. They say that it was to sinners that God has been sent. Do you not call him a sinner, then, who is unjust, and a thief, and a house-breaker, and a poisoner, and a committer of sacrilege, and a robber of the dead? What other persons would a man invite if he were issuing a proclamation for an assembly of robbers?

Why was he not sent to those who were without sin? What evil is it not to have committed sin? They assert that God will receive the unrighteous man if he humble himself on account of his wickedness, but that he will not receive the righteous man [Matthew 9:13], although he look up to him, adorned with virtue from the beginning. Those persons who preside properly over a trial make those individuals who bewail before them their evil deeds to cease from their piteous wailings, lest their decisions should be determined rather by compassion than by a regard to truth; whereas God does not decide in accordance with truth, but in accordance with flattery! This much is indeed apparently true, that somehow the human race is naturally inclined to sin. All men, then, without distinction, ought to be invited, since all indeed are sinners. Why this preference for sinners over others?

They utter these exhortations for the conversion of sinners, because they are able to gain over no one who is really good and righteous, and therefore open their gates to the most unholy and abandoned of men. Sometimes, also, when very abandoned men are willing to accept the doctrine of future punishment, on account of the hope which is based upon repentance, they are prevented from so doing by their habit of sinning, being constantly dipped, and, as it were, dyed in wickedness, and possessing no longer the power to turn from it easily to a proper life, and one regulated according to right reason. And yet, indeed, it is manifest to every one that no one by chastisement or punishment, much less by merciful treatment, could effect a complete change in those who are sinners both by nature and custom, for to change nature is an exceedingly difficult thing. But they who are without sin are partakers of a better life.

They say that God will be able to do all things. True, but he will not desire to do anything wicked. Those who are inclined to sin by nature and habit, no one could completely reform and change for the better; entirely to change a nature is exceedingly difficult. As if God, like those who are overcome with pity, being himself overcome, alleviates the sufferings of the wicked through pity for their wailings, and casts off the good, who do nothing of that kind, which is the height of injustice!

A teacher of their doctrine says, “Wise men reject what we say, being led into error, and ensnared by their wisdom.” The ambassador of Christianity relates ridiculous things; no wise man believes the Gospel, being driven away by the multitudes who adhere to it. The teacher of Christianity acts like a person who promises to restore patients to bodily health, but who prevents them from consulting skilled physicians, by whom his ignorance would be exposed. They seek after the unintelligent, with their vulgar discourses. A Christian teacher said to my acquaintances, “I alone will save you.” They warn that those who really are true physicians destroy those whom they promise to cure.

Their teacher acts like a drunken man, who, entering a company of drunkards, should accuse those who are sober of being drunk. Such an one, their teacher, amongst a company of those who are afflicted with ophthalmia, accuses those who are sharp-sighted of being blind. These charges I have to bring against them, and others of a similar nature, not to enumerate them one by one, and I affirm that they are in error, and that they act insolently towards God, in order to lead on wicked men by empty hopes, and to persuade them to despise better things, saying that if they refrain from them it will be better for them. Thus they are won over through vain hopes.

God Came Down for What?

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, is a most shameless assertion, and one the refutation of which does not need many words. He is said by the Christians to have already come, but by the Jews that his advent as Messiah is still future. What is the meaning of such a descent upon the part of God? Was it in order to learn what goes on amongst men? Does he not know all things? And if he does know, why does he not make men better? 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? Then God does know all things indeed, but does not make men better, nor is able to do so by His divine power! If God Himself will come down to men, then he has left his own abode, although if you were to change a single one, even the least, of things on earth, all things would be overturned and disappear.

Now I suppose God, being unknown amongst men, and deeming himself on that account to have less than his due, 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. 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. 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 perfectly manifest that they babble about God in a way that is neither holy nor reverential, like those who in the Bacchic mysteries introduce phantoms and objects of terror.

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. 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, this made them give utterance to the erroneous opinion that God will descend, and come down bearing fire like a torturer.

The True Theology

And again 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. 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 remolding, but of an immortal to remain the same and unaltered. God, then, could not admit of such a change.

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. God does not fear any one, so as to escape danger by leading into error those who conspire against him, nor is anyone who is either in a state of sickness or mental alienation a friend of God.

Concerning this coming, the Jews teach 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. The Christians make statements additional to this. Moses, who wrote the account of the tower, and the confusion of tongues, has perverted the story of the sons of Aloeus, and referred it to the tower. The destruction by fire, moreover, of Sodom and Gomorrah [Genesis 19:24] on account of their sins, related by Moses in Genesis, is like the story of Phaethon. 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 having chastised Jesus, and given him gall to drink, have brought upon themselves the divine wrath.

Ants and Worms

The race of Jews and Christians, are all of them like 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 corner 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 themselves all things beforehand; and that, abandoning the whole world, and the regions of heaven, and this great earth, he becomes a citizen among themselves alone, and to themselves alone makes his intimations, and does not cease sending and inquiring, in what way they may be associated with him for ever. They are like 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. The worms—that is, they themselves—say that now, since certain amongst us commit sin, God will come to us or will send his son to consume the wicked with fire, that the rest of us may have eternal life with him. Such wranglings would be more endurable amongst worms and frogs than betwixt Jews and Christians who quarrel with one another!

The Christians say that God, having abandoned the heavenly regions, and despising this great earth, takes up his abode amongst themselves alone, and to themselves alone makes His announcements, and ceases not his messages and inquiries as to how they may become his associates for ever. The Jews were fugitives from Egypt, who, though beloved by God, never performed anything worthy of note, and never were held in any reputation or account! The first book of Moses is entitled “Genesis.” The Jews accordingly endeavored 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, and which they misinterpreted to the unlearned and ignorant, and that, too, when such a point had never been called in question during the long preceding period. Concerning those names, from which the Jews deduce their genealogies, never, during the long antecedent period, had there been any dispute about these names, but at the present time the Jews dispute about them with certain others.

History proves 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. The Jews, then, leading a grovelling life in some corner 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, viz., that a certain man was formed by the hands of God, and had breathed into him the breath of life. [Genesis 2:7.] Thus fashioned by the hands of God, the man was inflated by breath blown into him. A woman was taken from his side, and God issued certain commands, and a serpent opposed these, and gained a victory over the commandments of God; the serpent counteracted the injunctions given by God to the man. Thus they relate certain old wives’ fables, and most impiously represent God as weak at the very beginning of things, and unable to convince and gain over to obedience even a single human being whom he himself had formed.

The more modest among Jews and Christians are ashamed of these things, and endeavor to give them somehow an allegorical signification. They speak, in the next place, of a deluge, and of a monstrous ark, having within it all things, and of a dove and a crow as messengers, falsifying and recklessly altering 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. Altogether absurd, and out of season is the account of the begetting of children, the conspiracies of the brothers, a father’s sorrow, the crafty procedure of mothers. God presented his sons with asses, and sheep, and camels! God gave wells also to the righteous. The story of Lot and his daughters is worse than the crimes of Thyestes. The narrative describes the hatred of one brother for another, brothers who treacherously sally out on account of the insult offered to their sister, who had been violated by the son of a king, brothers selling one another, a brother sold, and a father deceived. They tell 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.

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. Joseph made himself known to his brethren; Joseph, who had been sold as a slave, was restored to liberty, and went up with a solemn procession to his father’s funeral. [Genesis 50:7.] 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.

The more modest among the Jewish and Christian writers endeavor somehow to give these stories an allegorical signification, taking refuge in allegory because they are ashamed of these things. But their writings are incapable of admitting an allegorical meaning; on the contrary they are commonplace and exceedingly silly inventions, and those who give them an allegorical interpretation do violence to the meaning of the writers. The allegorical explanations which have been devised are much more shameful and absurd than the fables themselves, inasmuch as they endeavor to unite with marvellous and altogether insensate folly things which cannot at all be made to harmonize.

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, while mortal things are the works of others, and the soul is a 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 is the same, and their corruptible part is alike.

None of these: the body of a man or the snakes which come out of the body; the body of an ox, or the bees which come from the ox; the body of a horse or of an ass, and the wasps which come from a horse, and the beetles which proceed from an ass, is the work of God. One common nature pervades all the previously mentioned bodies, and one which goes and returns the same amid recurring changes. No product of matter is immortal. On this point these remarks are sufficient; and if any one is capable of hearing and examining further, he will come to know the truth.

There neither were formerly, nor are there now, nor will there be again, more or fewer evils in the world than have always been. For the nature of all things is one and the same, and the generation of evils is always the same. It is not easy, indeed, for one who is not a philosopher to ascertain the origin of evils, though it is sufficient for the multitude to say that they do not proceed from God, but cleave to matter, and dwell among mortal things. The course of mortal things is the same from beginning to end, and the same things must always, according to the appointed cycles, recur in the past, present, and future. This is sufficient to say to the multitude regarding the origin of evils.

Neither have visible things been given to man by God, but each individual thing comes into existence and perishes for the sake of the safety of the whole passing agreeably to the change, which I have already mentioned, from one thing to another. The world was uncreated and incorruptible, and it was only the things on earth which underwent deluges and conflagrations, and all these things did not happen at the same time. There will neither be more nor less good and evil among mortals. God does not need to amend his work afresh; although a thing may seem to you to be evil, it is by no means certain that it is so; for you do not know what is of advantage to yourself, or to another, or to the whole world.

Their writings repeat words of anger addressed by God to the ungodly, and of threatenings directed against sinners. They speak, indeed, of the ‘wrath’ of God, though God is not subject to passion. Is it not ridiculous to suppose that, whereas a man, who became angry with the Jews, slew them all from the youth upwards, and burned their city, so powerless were they to resist him;—the mighty God, as they say, being angry, and indignant, and uttering threats, should instead of punishing them send his own son, who endured the sufferings which He did? But that I may speak not of the Jews alone, for that is not my object, but of the whole of nature, as I promised, I will bring out in a clearer light what has been already stated.

Animals Rule

They are blameworthy for asserting that God made all things for the sake of man. The history of animals, and the sagacity manifested by them, show that all things came into existence not more for the sake of man than of the irrational animals. Thunders, and lightnings, and rains are not the works of God; even if one were to grant that these are the works of God, they are brought into existence not more for the support of us who are human beings, than for that of plants, and trees, and herbs, and thorns. Although you may say that these things, viz., plants, and trees, and herbs, and thorns, grow for the use of men, why will you maintain that they grow for the use of men rather than for that of the most savage of irrational animals? Irrational animals are more beloved by God than men, and have a purer knowledge of divinity.

We indeed by labor and suffering earn a scanty and toilsome subsistence, while all things are produced for them without their sowing and plowing. But if you will quote the saying of Euripides, that

‘The Sun and Night are to mortals’ slaves,’

why should they be so in a greater degree to us than to ants and flies? For the night is created for them in order that they may rest, and the day that they may see and resume their work.

If one were to call us the lords of the animal creation because we hunt the other animals and live upon their flesh, we would say,—Why were not we rather created on their account, since they hunt and devour us? Nay, we require nets and weapons, and the assistance of many persons, along with dogs, when engaged in the chase; while they are immediately and spontaneously provided by nature with weapons which easily bring us under their power. With respect to your assertion, that God gave you the power to capture wild beasts, and to make your own use of them, we would say that, in all probability, in the beginning, before cities were built, and arts invented, and societies such as now exist were formed, and weapons and nets employed, men were generally caught and devoured by wild beasts, while wild beasts were very seldom captured by men. In this way God rather subjected men to wild beasts.

If men appear to be superior to irrational animals on this account, that they have built cities, and make use of a political constitution, and forms of government, and sovereignties, this is to say nothing to the purpose, for ants and bees do the same. Bees, indeed, have a sovereign, who has followers and attendants; and there occur among them wars and victories, and slaughterings of the vanquished, and cities and suburbs, and a succession of labors, and judgments passed upon the idle and the wicked; for the drones are driven away and punished. The wars among the bees convey instruction as to the manner in which wars, if ever there arise a necessity for them, should be waged in a just and orderly way among men.

The ants help one another with their loads, when they see one of their number toiling under them. The ants set apart in a place by themselves those grains which sprout forth, that they may not swell into bud, but may continue throughout the year as their food, evidence of the existence of reason among ants. When ants die, the survivors set apart a special place for their interment, in their ancestral sepulchres. And when they meet one another they enter into conversation, for which reason they never mistake their way; consequently they possess a full endowment of reason, and some common ideas on certain general subjects, and a voice by which they express themselves regarding accidental things. Come now, if one were to look down from heaven upon earth, in what respect would our actions appear to differ from those of ants and bees?

If, however, men entertain lofty notions because of their possessing the power of sorcery, yet even in that respect are serpents and eagles their superiors in wisdom; for they are acquainted with many prophylactics against poisons and diseases, and also with the virtues of certain stones which help to preserve their young. If men, however, fall in with these, they think that they have gained a wonderful possession.

If, because man has been able to grasp the idea of God, he is deemed superior to the other animals, let those who hold this opinion know that this capacity will be claimed by many of the other animals; and with good reason: for what would any one maintain to be more divine than the power of foreknowing and predicting future events? Men accordingly acquire the art from the other animals, and especially from birds. Those who listen to the indications furnished by them, become possessed of the gift of prophecy. If, then, birds, and the other prophetic animals, which are enabled by the gift of God to foreknow events, instruct us by means of signs, so much the nearer do they seem to be to the society of God, and to be endowed with greater wisdom, and to be more beloved by him. The more intelligent of men, moreover, say that the animals hold meetings which are more sacred than our assemblies, and that they know what is said at these meetings, and actually prove that in reality they possess this knowledge, when, having previously stated that the birds have declared their intention of departing to some particular place, and of doing this thing or the other, the truth of their assertions is established by the departure of the birds to the place in question, and by their doing the particular thing which was foretold. And no race of animals appears to be more observant of oaths than the elephants are, or to show greater devotion to divine things; and this, I presume, solely because they have some knowledge of God.

Birds of augury converse with one another; they are possessed of a divine soul, and are capable of perceiving the gods. What could be called more divine than the power of foreknowing and foretelling the future? Many of the animals claim to have ideas of God; the irrational animals are nearer the society of God than men. Not only are the irrational animals wiser than the human race, but they are more beloved by God than we! What of the elephants’ fidelity to oaths, and of their great devotedness to our God, and of the knowledge which they possess of him? That the stork is more pious than any human being, is shown by those accounts which are narrated regarding that creature’s display of filial affection in bringing food to its parents for their support. The Arabian bird, the phoenix, after many years repairs to Egypt, and bears thither its parent, when dead and buried in a ball of myrrh, and deposits its body in the Temple of the Sun:—an instance of piety.

All things, accordingly, were not made for man, any more than they were made for lions, or eagles, or dolphins, but that this world, as being God’s work, might be perfect and entire and complete in all respects. For this reason all things have been adjusted, not with reference to each other, but with regard to their bearing upon the whole. And God takes care of the whole, and his providence will never forsake it; and it does not become worse; nor does God after a time bring it back to himself; nor is he angry on account of men any more than on account of apes or flies; nor does he threaten these beings, each one of which has received its appointed lot in its proper place.

Angels and Demons

O Jews and Christians, no God or son of a God either came or will come down to earth. But if you mean that certain angels did so, then what do you call them? Are they gods, or some other race of beings? Some other race of beings doubtless, and in all probability demons. They assert that the angels who come down from heaven to confer benefits on mankind are a different race from the gods; in all probability they would be called demons.

The first point relating to the Jews which is fitted to excite wonder, is that they should worship the heaven and the angels who dwell therein, and yet pass by and neglect its most venerable and powerful parts, as the sun, the moon, and the other heavenly bodies, both fixed stars and planets, as if it were possible that ’the whole’ could be God, and yet its parts not divine; or as if it were reasonable to treat with the greatest respect those who are said to appear to such as are in darkness somewhere, blinded by some crooked sorcery, or dreaming dreams through the influence of shadowy spectres, while those who prophesy so clearly and strikingly to all men, by means of whom rain, and heat, and clouds, and thunder (to which they offer worship), and lightnings, and fruits, and all kinds of productiveness, are brought about,—by means of whom God is revealed to them,—the most prominent heralds among those beings that are above,—those that are truly heavenly angels,—are to be regarded as of no account! The sun, moon, and stars do foretell rain, and heat, and clouds, and thunders, and lightnings, and fruits, and all manner of productions. But sun, and moon, and stars are regarded by them as of no account.

It is folly on their part to suppose that when God, as if He were a cook, introduces the fire which is to consume the world [2 Peter 3:10], all the rest of the human race will be burnt up, while they alone will remain, not only such of them as are then alive, but also those who are long since dead, which latter will arise from the earth clothed with the self-same flesh as during life; for such a hope is simply one which might be cherished by worms. For what sort of human soul is that which would still long for a body that had been subject to corruption? Whence, also, this opinion of yours is not shared by some of the Christians, and they pronounce it to be exceedingly vile, and loathsome, and impossible; for what kind of body is that which, after being completely corrupted, can return to its original nature, and to that self-same first condition out of which it fell into dissolution? Being unable to return any answer, they betake themselves to a most absurd refuge, viz., that all things are possible to God. And yet God cannot do things that are disgraceful, nor does he wish to do things that are contrary to his nature; nor, if in accordance with the wickedness of your own heart you desired anything that was evil, would God accomplish it; nor must you believe at once that it will be done. For God does not rule the world in order to satisfy inordinate desires, or to allow error and disorder and confusion, but to govern a nature that is upright and just.

It is said by them that there will remain at the time of the visitation which is to come upon the world by the fire of purification, not only those who are then alive, but also those who are long ago dead. With the same bodies, without a change to a higher condition, shall those who were long dead arise from the earth and live again. For the soul, indeed, God might be able to provide an everlasting life; while, on the contrary, Heraclitus observes that dead bodies are to be cast out as more worthless than dung. God, however, neither can nor will declare, contrary to all reason, that the flesh, which is full of those things which it is not even honorable to mention, is to exist for ever. For God himself is the reason of all things that exist, and therefore can do nothing either contrary to reason or contrary to himself.

Laws of the Jews

As the Jews, then, became a peculiar people, and enacted laws in keeping with the customs of their country, and maintain them up to the present time, and observe a mode of worship which, whatever be its nature, is yet derived from their fathers, they act in these respects like other men, because each nation retains its ancestral customs, whatever they are, if they happen to be established among them. And such an arrangement appears to be advantageous, not only because it has occurred to the mind of other nations to decide some things differently, but also because it is a duty to protect what has been established for the public advantage; and also because, in all probability, the various quarters of the earth were from the beginning allotted to different superintending spirits, and were thus allotted among certain governing powers, and in this manner the administration of the world is carried on. And whatever is done among each nation in this way would be rightly done, wherever it was agreeable to the wishes of the superintending powers, while it would be an act of impiety to get rid of the institutions established from the beginning in the various places. We must observe the laws because it is a duty to protect what has been enacted; because of the superintendents distributed among the different parts of the earth, what is done among each nation is rightly done.

Let the second party come forward; and I shall ask them whence they come, and whom they regard as the originator of their ancestral customs. They will reply:—No one, because they spring from the same source as the Jews themselves, and derive their instruction and superintendence from no other quarter, and notwithstanding they have revolted from the Jews.

We might adduce Herodotus as a witness on this point, for he expresses himself as follows: ‘For the people of the cities Mares and Apis, who inhabit those parts of Egypt that are adjacent to Libya, and who look upon themselves as Libyans, and not as Egyptians, finding their sacrificial worship oppressive, and wishing not to be excluded from the use of cows’ flesh, sent to the oracle of Jupiter Ammon, saying that there was no relationship between them and the Egyptians, that they dwelt outside the Delta, that there was no community of sentiment between them and the Egyptians, and that they wished to be allowed to partake of all kinds of food. But the god would not allow them to do as they desired, saying that that country was a part of Egypt, which was watered by the inundation of the Nile, and that those were Egyptians who dwell to the south of the city of Elephantine, and drink of the river Nile.’ Such is the narrative of Herodotus. Ammon did not make a worse ambassador of divine things than did the angels of the Jews!

For if any one were to make this proposal to all men, viz., to bid him select out of all existing laws the best, each would choose, after examination, those of his own country. Men each consider their own laws much the best, and therefore it is not likely than any other than a madman would make these things a subject of ridicule. But that such are the conclusions of all men regarding the laws, may be determined by many other evidences, and especially by the following illustration. Darius, during his reign, having summoned before him those Greeks who happened to be present at the time, inquired of them for how much they would be willing to eat their deceased fathers? their answer was, that for no consideration would they do such a thing. After this, Darius summoned those Indians who are called Callatians. who are in the habit of eating their parents, and asked of them in the presence of these Greeks, who learned what passed through an interpreter, for what amount of money they would undertake to burn their deceased fathers with fire? on which they raised a loud shout, and bade the king say no more. Such is the way, then, in which these matters are regarded. And Pindar appears to me to be right in saying that ‘law’ is the king of all things. It is an obligation incumbent on all men to live according to their country’s customs, in which case they will escape censure; whereas the Christians, who have abandoned their native usages, and who are not one nation like the Jews, are to be blamed for giving their adherence to the teaching of Jesus.

If, then, in these respects the Jews were carefully to preserve their own law, they are not to be blamed for so doing, but those persons rather who have forsaken their own usages, and adopted those of the Jews. And if they pride themselves on it, as being possessed of superior wisdom, and keep aloof from intercourse with others, as not being equally pure with themselves, they have already heard that their doctrine concerning heaven is not peculiar to them, but, to pass by all others, is one which has long ago been received by the Persians, as Herodotus somewhere mentions. ‘For they have a custom,’ he says, ‘of going up to the tops of the mountains, and of offering sacrifices to Jupiter, giving the name of Jupiter to the whole circle of the heavens.’ Those Ethiopians who inhabit Meroe know only of two gods, Jupiter and Bacchus, and worship these alone; and the Arabians also know only of two, viz., Bacchus, who is also an Ethiopian deity, and Urania, whose worship is confined to them. And I think that it makes no difference whether you call the highest being Zeus, or Zen, or Adonai, or Sabaoth, or Ammoun like the Egyptians, or Pappaeus like the Scythians. To the wise it makes no difference whether the God who is over all things be called by the name of Zeus, which is current among the Greeks, or by that, e.g., which is in use among the Indians or Egyptians.

Nor would they be deemed at all holier than others in this respect, that they observe the rite of circumcision, for this was done by the Egyptians and Colchians before them; nor because they abstain from swine’s flesh, for the Egyptians practiced abstinence not only from it, but from the flesh of goats, and sheep, and oxen, and fishes as well; while Pythagoras and his disciples do not eat beans, nor anything that contains life. It is not probable, however, that they enjoy God’s favor, or are loved by him differently from others, or that angels were sent from heaven to them alone, as if they had had allotted to them ‘some region of the blessed,’ for we see both themselves and the country of which they were deemed worthy. Let this band, then, take its departure, after paying the penalty of its vaunting, not having a knowledge of the great God, but being led away and deceived by the artifices of Moses, having become his pupil to no good end.

It is not probable that the Jews are in great favor with God, or are regarded by him with more affection than others; for we may see both the people themselves, and the country of which they were deemed worthy. The Christians nevertheless maintain that it was the fortune of the people of the Jews in a remarkable degree to enjoy God’s favor, and to be loved by him in a way different from others. So whence came they and who is their leader, and what law proceeded from him?

Let us then pass over the refutations which might be adduced against the claims of their teacher, and let him be regarded as really an angel. But is he the first and only one who came to men, or were there others before him? If they should say that he is the only one, they would be convicted of telling lies against themselves. For they assert that on many occasions others came, and sixty or seventy of them descended together, and that these became wicked, and were cast under the earth and punished with chains, and that from this source originate the warm springs, which are the angels’ tears; and, moreover, that there came an angel to the tomb of this said being—according to some, indeed, one, but according to others, two—who answered the women that he had arisen. For the son of God could not himself, as it seems, open the tomb, but needed the help of another to roll away the stone! And again, on account of the pregnancy of Mary, there came an angel to the carpenter [Matthew 1:20], and once more another angel, in order that they might take up the new-born child, whose life was in danger, and flee away into Egypt. [Matthew 2:13.] But what need is there to particularize everything, or to count up the number of angels said to have been sent to Moses, and others amongst them as well? If, then, others were sent, it is manifest that he also came from the same God. But he may be supposed to have the appearance of announcing something of greater importance than those who preceded him, as if the Jews had been committing sin, or corrupting their religion, or doing deeds of impiety; for these things are obscurely hinted at.

Let him appear to be really an angel; is he the first and only one who came, or did others come on former occasions? And so he is not the only one who is recorded to have visited the human race, as even those who, under pretext of teaching in the name of Jesus, have apostatized from the Creator as an inferior being, and have given in their adherence to one who is a superior God and father of him who visited the world, assert that before him certain beings came from the Creator to visit the human race. The Jews accordingly, and these Christians, have the same God. It is certain, indeed, that the members of the great Church admit this, and adopt as true the accounts regarding the creation of the world which are current among the Jews, viz., concerning the six days and the seventh, on which day God rested. Relating to the first man, they give the same account as do the Jews, and deduce the same genealogy from him as they do.

Multiplicity of Sects

Let no one suppose that I am ignorant that some of them will concede that their God is the same as that of the Jews, while others will maintain that he is a different one, to whom the latter is in opposition, and that it was from the former that the Son came. To the Church belong those of the multitude; there are, moreover, certain Christians termed Sibyllists, believers in the Sibyl. Certain Simonians worship Helene, or Helenus, as their teacher, and are called Helenians; there are, moreover, certain Marcellians, so called from Marcellina, and Harpocratians from Salome, and others who derive their name from Mariamme, and others again from Martha. There are others who have wickedly invented some being as their teacher and demon, and who wallow about in a great darkness, more unholy and accursed than that of the companions of the Egyptian Antinous.

Moreover, these persons utter against one another dreadful blasphemies, saying all manner of things shameful to be spoken; nor will they yield in the slightest point for the sake of harmony, hating each other with a perfect hatred. Certain among the Christians are called ‘cauterized in the ears;’ and some are termed ‘enigmas.’ You may hear all those who differ so widely, and who assail each other in their disputes with the most shameless language, uttering the words, ‘The world is crucified to me, and I unto the world.’

Although they have no foundation for the doctrine, let us examine the system itself; and, in the first place, let us mention the corruptions which they have made through ignorance and misunderstanding, when in the discussion of elementary principles they express their opinions in the most absurd manner on things which they do not understand, such as the following.

These things are stated much better among the Greeks than in the Scriptures, and in a manner which is free from all exaggerations and promises on the part of God, or the son of God. Plato, for example, the son of Ariston, in one of his Epistles, discoursing about the ‘chief good,’ says, “The chief good can by no means be described in words, but is produced by long habit, and bursts forth suddenly as a light in the soul, as from a fire which had leapt forth.” An epistle of Plato contains another statement to the following effect, viz.: “If it appeared to me that these matters could be adequately explained to the multitude in writing and in oral address, what nobler pursuit in life could have been followed by me, than to commit to writing what was to prove of such advantage to human beings, and to lead the nature of all men onwards to the light?”

Another quotation from Plato will show how the employment of the method of question and answer sheds light on the thoughts of those who philosophize. As Plato demonstrates, “the good” can be known by few, since the multitude, being puffed up with a contempt for others, which is far from right, and being filled with vain and lofty hopes, assert that, because they have come to the knowledge of some venerable doctrines, certain things are true. Yet although Plato predicted these things, he nevertheless does not talk marvels, nor shut the mouth of those who wish to ask him for information on the subject of his promises; nor does he command them to come at once and believe that a god of a particular kind exists, and that he has a son of a particular nature, who descended to earth and conversed with himself personally.