37

much child-bearing may result from such unions, and that, forsooth, those who are grieved should be consoled by such unions. And Epicurus himself, along with teaching atheism, also advises having intercourse with mothers and sisters, and to go beyond the laws forbidding this. For Solon also legislated clearly concerning this, so that children might be born legitimately from marriage, to prevent those born from being of adultery, lest someone honor one who is not a father as a father, or dishonor one who is truly a father, not knowing him as a father. And how many other laws of both Romans and Greeks forbid such things to be done. To what end, then, do Epicurus and the Stoics teach that incest with sisters and intercourse with males should be practiced, with which teachings they have filled libraries, so that from childhood one might learn lawless intercourse? And why should I waste more time on them, when indeed they have proclaimed similar things even about those they call gods? For after saying that there are gods, they again considered them as nothing. For some said they were composed of atoms, or else dissolve into atoms, and they say the gods can do nothing more than men. But Plato, after saying there are gods, wants them to be composed of matter. But Pythagoras, after laboring so much about the gods and making the journey up and down, finally declares that nature and chance are all things, and says that the gods care nothing for men. And how many things Clitomachus the Academic introduced about atheism. And why not also Critias and Protagoras of Abdera, saying: "For whether gods exist, I am not able to say, nor to declare what sort they are; for many things hinder me"? For it is superfluous for us even to speak of the things concerning Euhemerus the most atheistic. For having dared to utter many things about the gods, finally he wishes that there are no gods at all, but that all things are governed by chance. But Plato, who said so much about the monarchy of God and the soul of man, declaring the soul to be immortal, is he not later found contradicting himself, saying that souls pass into other men, and some even go into irrational animals? How will his doctrine not appear terrible and unlawful to those who have sense, that what was once a man will again be a wolf or a dog or a donkey or some other irrational beast? Consistent with this, Pythagoras is also found talking nonsense, in addition to cutting off providence. Which of them, then, shall we believe? Philemon the comic poet who says: "For those who worship God have good hopes for salvation," or those whom we have mentioned before, Euhemerus and Epicurus and Pythagoras and the rest who deny that there is reverence for God and who do away with providence. Therefore, concerning God and providence, Ariston said: "Take courage, God is accustomed to helping all the worthy, and such people very much. If there is not some precedence appointed for those who live as they ought, what is the advantage of being pious? For may it be so, but I see too much

37

παιδοποιΐα πολλὴ γίνηται ἐκ τῶν τοιούτων, καὶ ὡς δῆθεν τοὺς λυπουμένους διὰ τοιούτων ὁμιλιῶν χρῆν παραμυθεῖσθαι. Ἐπίκουρος δὲ καὶ αὐτὸς σὺν τῷ ἀθεότητα διδάσκειν συμβουλεύει καὶ μητράσι καὶ ἀδελφαῖς συμμίγνυσθαι, καὶ πέρα τῶν νόμων τῶν τόδε κωλυόντων. ὁ γὰρ Σόλων καὶ περὶ τούτου σαφῶς ἐνομοθέτησεν, ὅπως ἐκ τοῦ γήμαντος οἱ παῖδες νομίμως γίνωνται, πρὸς τὸ μὴ ἐκ μοιχείας τοὺς γεννωμένους εἶναι, ἵνα μὴ τὸν οὐκ ὄντα πατέρα τιμήσῃ τις ὡς πατέρα, ἢ τὸν ὄντως πατέρα ἀτιμάσῃ τις ἀγνοῶν ὡς μὴ πατέρα. ὁπόσα τε οἱ λοιποὶ νόμοι κωλύουσιν Ῥωμαίων τε καὶ Ἑλλήνων τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσεσθαι. Πρὸς τί οὖν Ἐπίκουρος καὶ οἱ Στωϊκοὶ δογματίζουσιν ἀδελφο- κοιτίας καὶ ἀρρενοβασίας ἐπιτελεῖσθαι, ἐξ ὧν διδασκαλιῶν μεστὰς βιβλιοθήκας πεποιήκασιν, εἰς τὸ ἐκ παίδων μανθάνειν τὴν ἄθεσμον κοινωνίαν; καὶ τί μοι λοιπὸν κατατρίβεσθαι περὶ αὐτῶν, ὅπου γε καὶ περὶ τῶν θεῶν παρ' αὐτοῖς λεγομένων τὰ ὅμοια κατηγγέλκασιν; Θεοὺς γὰρ φήσαντες εἶναι πάλιν εἰς οὐδὲν αὐτοὺς ἡγήσαντο. οἱ μὲν γὰρ ἐξ ἀτόμων αὐτοὺς ἔφασαν συνεστάναι, ἢ δ' αὖ χωρεῖν εἰς ἀτόμους, καὶ μηδὲν πλεῖον ἀνθρώπων δύνασθαι τοὺς θεούς φασιν. Πλάτων δέ, θεοὺς εἰπὼν εἶναι, ὑλικοὺς αὐτοὺς βούλεται συνιστᾶν. Πυθαγόρας δέ, τοσαῦτα μοχθήσας περὶ θεῶν καὶ τὴν ἄνω κάτω πορείαν ποιησάμενος, ἔσχατον ὁρίζει φύσιν καὶ αὐτοματισμὸν εἶναί φησιν τῶν πάντων· θεοὺς ἀνθρώπων μηδὲν φροντίζειν. ὁπόσα δὲ Κλιτόμαχος ὁ Ἀκαδημαϊκὸς περὶ ἀθεότητος εἰσηγήσατο. τί δ' οὐχὶ καὶ Κριτίας καὶ Πρωταγόρας ὁ Ἀβδηρίτης λέγων· Ἕἴτε γάρ εἰσιν θεοί, οὐ δύναμαι περὶ αὐτῶν λέγειν, οὔτε ὁποῖοί εἰσιν δηλῶσαι· πολλὰ γάρ ἐστιν τὰ κωλύοντά με"; τὰ γὰρ περὶ Eὐημέρου τοῦ ἀθεωτάτου περισσὸν ἡμῖν καὶ λέγειν. πολλὰ γὰρ περὶ θεῶν τολμήσας φθέγξασθαι ἔσχατον καὶ τὸ ἐξόλου μὴ εἶναι θεούς, ἀλλὰ τὰ πάντα αὐτοματισμῷ διοικεῖσθαι βούλεται. Πλάτων δέ, ὁ τοσαῦτα εἰπὼν περὶ μοναρχίας θεοῦ καὶ ψυχῆς ἀνθρώπου, φάσκων ἀθάνατον εἶναι τὴν ψυχήν, οὐκ αὐτὸς ὕστερον εὑρίσκεται ἐναντία ἑαυτῷ λέγων, τὰς μὲν ψυχὰς μετέρχεσθαι εἰς ἑτέρους ἀνθρώπους, ἐνίων δὲ καὶ εἰς ἄλογα ζῶα χωρεῖν; πῶς οὐ δεινὸν καὶ ἀθέμιτον δόγμα αὐτοῦ τοῖς γε νοῦν ἔχουσι φανήσεται, ἵνα ὅ ποτε ἄνθρωπος πάλιν ἔσται λύκος ἢ κύων ἢ ὄνος ἢ ἄλλο τι ἄλογον κτῆνος; τούτῳ ἀκόλουθα καὶ Πυθα- γόρας εὑρίσκεται φλυαρῶν, πρὸς τῷ καὶ πρόνοιαν ἐκκόπτειν. Τίνι οὖν αὐτῶν πιστεύσωμεν, Φιλήμονι τῷ κωμικῷ λέγοντι· Oἱ γὰρ θεὸν σέβοντες ἐλπίδας καλὰς ἔχουσιν εἰς σωτηρίαν, ἢ οἷς προειρήκαμεν Eὐημέρῳ καὶ Ἐπικούρῳ καὶ Πυθαγόρᾳ καὶ τοῖς λοιποῖς ἀρνουμένοις εἶναι θεοσέβειαν καὶ πρόνοιαν ἀναιροῦσιν. περὶ μὲν οὖν θεοῦ καὶ προνοίας Ἀρίστων ἔφη· Θάρσει, βοηθεῖν πᾶσι μὲν τοῖς ἀξίοις εἴωθεν ὁ θεός, τοῖς δὲ τοιούτοις σφόδρα. εἰ μὴ πάρεσται προεδρία τις κειμένη τοῖς ζῶσιν ὡς δεῖ, τί πλέον ἐστὶν εὐσεβεῖν; εἴη γὰρ οὕτως, ἀλλὰ καὶ λίαν ὁρῶ