Chapter LVI.
Moreover, since Celsus asserts that “the soul is the work of God, but that the nature of body is different; and that 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 alike,”—we have to say in answer to this argument of his, that if, since the same matter underlies the body of a bat, or of a worm, or of a frog, or of a man, these bodies will differ in no respect from one another, it is evident then that these bodies also will differ in no respect from the sun, or the moon, or the stars, or the sky, or any other thing which is called by the Greeks a god, cognisable by the senses.864 αἰσθητοῦ θεοῦ. For the same matter, underlying all bodies, is, properly speaking, without qualities and without form, and derives its qualities from some (other) source, I know not whence, since Celsus will have it that nothing corruptible can be the work of God. Now the corruptible part of everything whatever, being produced from the same underlying matter, must necessarily be the same, by Celsus’ own showing; unless, indeed, finding himself here hard pressed, he should desert Plato, who makes the soul arise from a certain bowl,865 Cf. Plato in Timæo. and take refuge with Aristotle and the Peripatetics, who maintain that the ether is immaterial,866 ἄϋλον. and consists of a fifth nature, separate from the other four elements,867 πέμπτης παρὰ τὰ τέσσαρα στοιχεῖα εἷναι φύσεως. against which view both the Platonists and the Stoics have nobly protested. And we too, who are despised by Celsus, will contravene it, seeing we are required to explain and maintain the following statement of the prophet: The heavens shall perish, but Thou remainest: and they all shall wax old as a garment; and as a vesture shalt Thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but Thou art the same.”868 Cf. Ps. cii. 26, 27. These remarks, however, are sufficient in reply to Celsus, when he asserts that “the soul is the work of God, but that the nature of body is different;” for from his argument it follows that there is no difference between the body of a bat, or of a worm, or of a frog, and that of a heavenly869 αἰθερίου. being.
Ἔτι δὲ ἐπεί φησιν ὁ Κέλσος ὅτι ψυχὴ μὲν θεοῦ ἔργον, σώματος δὲ ἄλλη φύσις. Καὶ ταύτῃ γε οὐδὲν διοίσει νυκτερίδος ἢ εὐλῆς ἢ βατράχου ἢ ἀνθρώπου σῶμα· ὕλη γὰρ ἡ αὐτή, καὶ τὸ φθαρτὸν αὐτῶν ὅμοιον, λεκτέον καὶ πρὸς τοῦτον αὐτοῦ τὸν λόγον ὅτι εἴπερ, ἐπεὶ ἡ ὕλη ἡ αὐτὴ ὑπόκειται νυκτερίδος ἢ εὐλῆς ἢ βατράχου ἢ ἀνθρώπου σώματι, οὐδὲν διοίσει ἀλλήλων ταῦτα τὰ σώματα, δηλονότι οὐδὲν διοίσει τὰ τούτων σώματα ἡλίου ἢ σελήνης ἢ ἀστέρων ἢ οὐρανοῦ ἢ οὑτινοσοῦν ἄλλου λεγομένου παρ' Ἕλλησιν αἰσθητοῦ θεοῦ. Ὕλη γὰρ ἡ αὐτὴ πᾶσι τοῖς σώμασιν ὑποκειμένη τῷ ἰδίῳ λόγῳ ἄποιος καὶ ἀσχημάτιστος, τὰς ποιότητας οὐκ οἶδα κατὰ Κέλσον, τὸν μὴ θέλοντα φθαρτόν τι ἔργον εἶναι τοῦ θεοῦ, ὑπὸ τίνος λαμβάνουσα. Τὸ γὰρ φθαρτὸν ἀνάγκη παντὸς οὑτινοσοῦν ἐκ τῆς αὐτῆς ὑποκειμένης ὕλης γεγενημένου ὅμοιον εἶναι κατὰ τὸν Κέλσον τῷ ἑαυτοῦ λόγῳ. Εἰ μὴ ἄρα ἐνταῦθα ὁ Κέλσος θλιβόμενος ἀποπηδήσεται μὲν ἀπὸ Πλάτωνος, τοῦ ἔκ τινος κρατῆρος τὴν ψυχὴν ποιοῦντος, προσφεύξεται δὲ Ἀριστοτέλει καὶ τοῖς ἀπὸ τοῦ Περιπάτου, ἄϋλον φάσκουσιν εἶναι τὸν αἰθέρα, καὶ πέμπτης παρὰ τὰ τέσσαρα στοιχεῖα αὐτὸν εἶναι φύσεως· πρὸς ὃν λόγον οὐκ ἀγεννῶς καὶ οἱ ἀπὸ Πλάτωνος καὶ οἱ ἀπὸ τῆς Στοᾶς ἔστησαν. Καὶ ἡμεῖς δὲ οἱ ὑπὸ τοῦ Κέλσου καταφρονούμενοι στησόμεθα, ἀπαιτούμενοι διηγήσασθαι καὶ κατασκευάσαι τὸ ἐν τῷ προφήτῃ λεγόμενον οὕτως· "Οἱ οὐρανοὶ ἀπολοῦνται, σὺ δὲ διαμενεῖς· καὶ πάντες ὡς ἱμάτιον παλαιωθήσονται, καὶ ὡσεὶ περιβόλαιον ἑλίξεις αὐτούς, καὶ ἀλλαγήσονται. Σὺ δὲ ὁ αὐτὸς εἶ." Πλὴν ἀρκεῖ πρὸς τὸν Κέλσον καὶ ταῦτα ἀποφηνάμενον ὅτι ψυχὴ μὲν θεοῦ ἔργον, σώματος δὲ ἄλλη φύσις· οὗ τῷ λόγῳ ἠκολούθησε μηδὲν διαφέρειν νυκτερίδος ἢ εὐλῆς ἢ βατράχου σῶμα τοῦ αἰθερίου σώματος.