Contra Celsum ΠΡΟΣ ΤΟΝ ΕΠΙΓΕΓΡΑΜΜΕΝΟΝ ΚΕΛΣΟΥ ΑΛΗΘΗ ΛΟΓΟΝ ΩΡΙΓΕΝΟΥΣ ΤΟΜΟΙ Ηʹ
ΠΡΟΣ ΤΟΝ ΕΠΙΓΕΓΡΑΜΜΕΝΟΝ ΚΕΛΣΟΥ ΑΛΗΘΗ ΛΟΓΟΝ ΩΡΙΓΕΝΟΥΣ ΤΟΜΟΣ ΠΡΩΤΟΣ
ΠΡΟΣ ΤΟΝ ΕΠΙΓΕΓΡΑΜΜΕΝΟΝ ΚΕΛΣΟΥ ΑΛΗΘΗ ΛΟΓΟΝ ΩΡΙΓΕΝΟΥΣ ΤΟΜΟΣ ∆ΕΥΤΕΡΟΣ
ΠΡΟΣ ΤΟΝ ΕΠΙΓΕΓΡΑΜΜΕΝΟΝ ΚΕΛΣΟΥ ΑΛΗΘΗ ΛΟΓΟΝ ΩΡΙΓΕΝΟΥΣ ΤΟΜΟΣ ΤΡΙΤΟΣ
ΠΡΟΣ ΤΟΝ ΕΠΙΓΕΓΡΑΜΜΕΝΟΝ ΚΕΛΣΟΥ ΑΛΗΘΗ ΛΟΓΟΝ ΩΡΙΓΕΝΟΥΣ ΤΟΜΟΣ ΤΕΤΑΡΤΟΣ
ΠΡΟΣ ΤΟΝ ΕΠΙΓΕΓΡΑΜΜΕΝΟΝ ΚΕΛΣΟΥ ΑΛΗΘΗ ΛΟΓΟΝ ΩΡΙΓΕΝΟΥΣ ΤΟΜΟΣ ΠΕΜΠΤΟΣ
ΠΡΟΣ ΤΟΝ ΕΠΙΓΕΓΡΑΜΜΕΝΟΝ ΚΕΛΣΟΥ ΑΛΗΘΗ ΛΟΓΟΝ ΩΡΙΓΕΝΟΥΣ ΤΟΜΟΣ ΕΚΤΟΣ
ΠΡΟΣ ΤΟΝ ΕΠΙΓΕΓΡΑΜΜΕΝΟΝ ΚΕΛΣΟΥ ΑΛΗΘΗ ΛΟΓΟΝ ΩΡΙΓΕΝΟΥΣ ΤΟΜΟΣ ΕΒ∆ΟΜΟΣ
ΠΡΟΣ ΤΟΝ ΕΠΙΓΕΓΡΑΜΜΕΝΟΝ ΚΕΛΣΟΥ ΑΛΗΘΗ ΛΟΓΟΝ ΩΡΙΓΕΝΟΥΣ ΤΟΜΟΣ ΟΓ∆ΟΟΣ
Chapter LVI.
Proceeding immediately after to mix up and compare with one another things that are dissimilar, and incapable of being united, he subjoins to his statement regarding the sixty or seventy angels who came down from heaven, and who, according to him, shed fountains of warm water for tears, the following: “It is related also that there came to the tomb of Jesus himself, according to some, two angels, according to others, one;” having failed to notice, I think, that Matthew and Mark speak of one, and Luke and John of two, which statements are not contradictory. For they who mention “one,” say that it was he who rolled away the stone from the sepulchre; while they who mention “two,” refer to those who appeared in shining raiment to the women that repaired to the sepulchre, or who were seen within sitting in white garments. Each of these occurrences might now be demonstrated to have actually taken place, and to be indicative of a figurative meaning existing in these “phenomena,” (and intelligible) to those who were prepared to behold the resurrection of the Word. Such a task, however, does not belong to our present purpose, but rather to an exposition of the Gospel.1176 [See Dr. Lee on The Inspiration of Holy Scripture, p. 383, where it is pointed out that the primitive Church was fully aware of the difficulties urged against the historic accuracy of the Four Gospels. Dr. Lee also notes that the culminating sarcasm of Gibbon’s famous fifteenth chapter “has not even the poor merit of originality.” S.]
Εἶτα ἑξῆς τὰ ἄμικτα καὶ ἀνόμοια μιγνὺς καὶ ἐξομοιῶν ἀλλήλοις ἐπιφέρει τῷ περὶ τῶν, ὥς φησι, καταβεβηκότων ἑξήκοντα ἢ ἑβδομήκοντα ἀγγέλων λόγῳ, πηγὰς θερμῶν κατὰ αὐτὸν δακρυσάντων, ὅτι καὶ πρὸς αὐτοῦ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ τὸν τάφον ἱστόρηνται ἐληλυθέναι ὑπό τινων μὲν ἄγγελοι δύο ὑπό τινων δὲ εἷς· οὐκ οἶμαι τηρήσας Ματθαῖον μὲν καὶ Μάρκον ἕνα ἱστορηκέναι, Λουκᾶν δὲ καὶ Ἰωάννην δύο, ἅπερ οὐκ ἦν ἐναντία. Οἱ μὲν γὰρ ἀναγράψαντες ἕνα τὸν ἀποκυ λίσαντα "τὸν λίθον" ἀπὸ τοῦ μνημείου τοῦτόν φασιν εἶναι, οἱ δὲ τοὺς δύο τοὺς ἐπιστάντας "ἐν ἐσθῆτι ἀστραπτούσῃ" ταῖς γενομέναις ἐπὶ τὸ μνημεῖον γυναιξὶν ἢ τοὺς θεωρηθέντας ἔνδον "ἐν λευκοῖς καθεζομένους". Ἕκαστον δὲ τούτων νῦν παραδεικνύναι δυνατὸν καὶ γεγενημένον καὶ δηλωτικόν τινος εἶναι τροπολογίας, τῆς περὶ τῶν προφαινομένων τοῖς τὴν ἀνάστασιν τοῦ λόγου θεωρεῖν παρεσκευασμένοις, οὐ τῆς παρούσης ἐστὶ πραγματείας ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον τῶν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου ἐξηγητικῶν.