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 VIII.
In the next place, after other Platonic declarations, which demonstrate that “the good” can be known by few, he adds: “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,1243 οὐ τερατεύεται. 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 me.” Now, in answer to this we have to say, that with regard to Plato, it is Aristander, I think, who has related that he was not the son of Ariston, but of a phantom, which approached Amphictione in the guise of Apollo. And there are several other of the followers of Plato who, in their lives of their master, have made the same statement. What are we to say, moreover, about Pythagoras, who relates the greatest possible amount of wonders, and who, in a general assembly of the Greeks, showed his ivory thigh, and asserted that he recognised the shield which he wore when he was Euphorbus, and who is said to have appeared on one day in two different cities! He, moreover, who will declare that what is related of Plato and Socrates belongs to the marvellous, will quote the story of the swan which was recommended to Socrates while he was asleep, and of the master saying when he met the young man, “This, then, was the swan!”1244 The night before Ariston brought Plato to Socrates as his pupil, the latter dreamed that a swan from the altar of Cupid alighted on his bosom. Cf. Pausanias in Atticis, p. 58. Nay, the third eye which Plato saw that he himself possessed, he will refer to the category of prodigies.1245 “Alicubi forsan occurrit: me vero uspiam legisse non memini. Credo Platonem per tertium oculum suam πολυμάθειαν et scientiam, quâ ceteris anteibat, denotare voluisse.”—Spencer. But occasion for slanderous accusations will never be wanting to those who are ill-disposed, and who wish to speak evil of what has happened to such as are raised above the multitude. Such persons will deride as a fiction even the demon of Socrates. We do not, then, relate marvels when we narrate the history of Jesus, nor have His genuine disciples recorded any such stories of Him; whereas this Celsus, who professes universal knowledge, and who quotes many of the sayings of Plato, is, I think, intentionally silent on the discourse concerning the Son of God which is related in Plato’s Epistle to Hermeas and Coriscus. Plato’s words are as follows: “And calling to witness the God of all things—the ruler both of things present and things to come, father and lord both of the ruler and cause—whom, if we are philosophers indeed, we shall all clearly know, so far as it is possible for happy human beings to attain such knowledge.”1246 Plato, Epist., vi.
Εἶτά φησι μετὰ ἄλλας λέξεις πλατωνικάς, δηλούσας ὅτι "ὀλίγοις" ἐστὶ γνωστὸν τὸ ἀγαθόν, ἐπεὶ οἱ πολλοὶ μετὰ "καταφρονήσεως οὐκ ὀρθῆς" "ὑψηλῆς καὶ χαύνης ἐλπίδος" πληρωθέντες "ὡς σεμνὰ ἄττα" μεμαθηκότες λέγουσί τινα ὡς ἀληθῆ, ὅτι ταῦτα προειρηκὼς ὁ Πλάτων ὅμως οὐ τερα τεύεται οὐδ' ἀποφράττει τοῦ προσερέσθαι βουλομένου τί ποτε ἐστὶν ὃ ἐπαγγέλλεται, τὴν γλῶτταν, οὐδ' αὐτόθεν κελεύει φθάσαντας πιστεύειν ὅτι τοιόσδε ἐστὶν ὁ θεὸς καὶ υἱὸν ἔχει τοιόνδε, καὶ οὗτος κατελθὼν ἐμοὶ διελέξατο. Καὶ πρὸς ταῦτά φημι ὅτι περὶ μὲν Πλάτωνος Ἀρίστανδρος οἶμαι ἀνέγραψεν ὡς οὐκ Ἀρίστωνος υἱοῦ ἀλλὰ φάσματος, ἐν Ἀπόλλωνος εἴδει προσελθόντος τῇ Ἀμφικτιόνῃ· καὶ ἄλλοι δὲ πλείονες τῶν Πλατωνικῶν ἐν τῷ Πλάτωνος βίῳ τοιαῦτ' εἰρήκασι· περὶ δὲ Πυθαγόρου, πλεῖστα ὅσα τερα τευσαμένου καὶ δείξαντος μὲν ἐν πανηγύρει Ἑλλήνων ἐλεφάντινον τὸν μηρὸν ἀνεγνωρικέναι δὲ φήσαντος τὴν ἀσπίδα, ᾗ ἐχρῆτο, ὅτ' Εὔφορβος ἦν, καὶ ἐν μιᾷ λεγομένου ἡμέρᾳ ἐν δύο πεφηνέναι πόλεσι, τί χρὴ καὶ λέγειν; Ὁ δὲ βουλόμενος κατηγορεῖν ὡς τερατείας ἱστορουμένης περὶ Πλάτωνος καὶ Σωκράτους ἐκθήσεται καὶ τὸν συνιστάμενον Σωκράτει καθ' ὕπνον κύκνον καὶ τὸν διδάσκαλον εἰπόντα ἐπὶ τῇ συστάσει τοῦ νεανίσκου· "Οὗτος ἄρα ὁ κύκνος ἦν." Ἀλλὰ καὶ ὃν τρίτον εἶδεν ὀφθαλμὸν ἑαυτὸν ἔχοντα ὁ Πλάτων εἰς τερατείαν ἀναλήψεται. Οὐ λείψει δὲ τοὺς κακοήθεις καὶ κακηγορεῖν βουλομένους τὰ τοῖς κρείττοσι παρὰ τοὺς πολλοὺς ἐπιφανέντα, διαβολὴ καὶ κακηγορία· οἵτινες καὶ τὸ Σωκράτους δαιμόνιον ὡς πλάσμα χλευάσουσιν. Οὐ τερατευόμεθα οὖν τὰ περὶ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ διηγούμενοι, οὐδ' οἱ γνήσιοι αὐτοῦ μαθηταὶ τοιούτους ἀνέγραψαν λόγους περὶ αὐτοῦ. Ὁ δὲ πάντ' ἐπαγγελλόμενος εἰδέναι Κέλσος καὶ πολλὰ τῶν Πλάτωνος παρατιθέμενος ἑκὼν οἶμαι σιωπᾷ τὸν περὶ υἱοῦ θεοῦ λόγον, τὸν παρὰ Πλάτωνι λελεγμένον ἐν τῇ πρὸς Ἑρμείαν καὶ Κορίσκον ἐπιστολῇ. Οὕτω δὲ ἔχει ἡ τοῦ Πλάτωνος λέξις· "Καὶ τὸν τῶν πάντων θεὸν ἡγεμόνα τῶν τε ὄντων καὶ τῶν μελλόντων, τοῦ τε ἡγεμονικοῦ καὶ αἰτίου πατέρα καὶ κύριον ἐπομνύντας· ὅν, ἂν ὄντως φιλοσοφῶμεν, εἰσόμεθα πάντες [σαφῶς] εἰς δύναμιν ἀνθρώπων εὐδαι μόνων."