Chapter XII.

He thinks, besides, that those who support the cause of Christ by a reference to the writings of the prophets can give no proper answer in regard to statements in them which attribute to God that which is wicked, shameful, or impure; and assuming that no answer can be given, he proceeds to draw a whole train of inferences, none of which can be allowed.  But he ought to know that those who wish to live according to the teaching of sacred Scripture understand the saying, “The knowledge of the unwise is as talk without sense,”1620    Ecclus. xxi. 18. and have learnt “to be ready always to give an answer to every one that asketh us a reason for the hope that is in us.”1621    1 Pet. iii. 15.  And they are not satisfied with affirming that such and such things have been predicted; but they endeavour to remove any apparent inconsistencies, and to show that, so far from there being anything evil, shameful, or impure in these predictions, everything is worthy of being received by those who understand the sacred Scriptures.  But Celsus ought to have adduced from the prophets examples of what he thought bad, or shameful, or impure, if he saw any such passages; for then his argument would have had much more force, and would have furthered his purpose much better.  He gives no instances, however, but contents himself with loudly asserting the false charge that these things are to be found in Scripture.  There is no reason, then, for us to defend ourselves against groundless charges, which are but empty sounds, or to take the trouble of showing that in the writings of the prophets there is nothing evil, shameful, impure, or abominable.

Οἴεται δὲ καὶ τοὺς ἀπὸ τῶν προφητῶν ἀπολογου μένους περὶ τῶν κατὰ τὸν Χριστὸν μηδὲν μὲν δύνασθαι πρὸς ἔπος λέγειν, ἐπὰν φαίνηταί τι πονηρὸν ἢ αἰσχρὸν ἢ ἀκάθαρτον λεγόμενον περὶ τοῦ θείου ἢ μιαρόν. ∆ιὸ καὶ ὡς μηδεμιᾶς οὔσης ἀπολογίας συνείρει ἑαυτῷ μυρία περὶ τῶν μὴ διδομένων. Εἰδέναι δὲ χρὴ ὅτι καὶ οἱ βουλόμενοι κατὰ τὰς θείας ζῆν γραφὰς καὶ ἐπιστάμενοι ὅτι "Γνῶσις ἀσυνέτου ἀδιεξέταστοι λόγοι" καὶ ἀναγνόντες τὸ "Ἕτοιμοι ἀεὶ πρὸς ἀπολογίαν παντὶ τῷ αἰτοῦντι ἡμᾶς λόγον περὶ τῆς ἐν ἡμῖν ἐλπίδος" οὐκ ἐπὶ μόνον τὸ προειρῆσθαι τάδε τινὰ καταφεύγουσιν, ἀλλὰ γὰρ καὶ τὰς δοκούσας ἀπεμφάσεις λύειν πειρῶνται καὶ δεικνύναι οὐδὲν εἶναι πονηρὸν ἐν τοῖς λόγοις οὐδ' αἰσχρὸν οὐδ' ἀκάθαρτον οὐδὲ μιαρὸν ἀλλὰ τοιοῦτον γίνεσθαι τοῖς ὡς χρὴ ἐκδέχεσθαι μὴ συνιεῖσι τὴν θείαν γραφήν. Ἐχρῆν δ' αὐτὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητῶν τὸ φαινόμενον ἐν αὐτοῖς πονηρὸν ἢ τὸ δοκοῦν αὐτῷ αἰσχρὸν ἢ τὸ νομιζόμενον αὐτῷ ἀκάθαρτον ἢ ὃ ὑπελάμβανεν εἶναι μιαρὸν παραθέσθαι, εἴπερ τοιαῦτα ἔβλεπεν ἐν τοῖς προφήταις εἰρημένα· πληκτι κώτερος γὰρ ἂν ὁ λόγος αὐτοῦ ἦν καὶ πρὸς ὃ ἐβούλετο ἀνυτικώτερος· νυνὶ δὲ οὐ παρέθετο, ἀλλ' ἐπανατεινάμενος ἀπειλεῖ τοιαῦτα φαίνεσθαι ἐν ταῖς γραφαῖς, καταψευδόμενος αὐτῶν. Πρὸς οὖν κενοὺς ψόφους ὀνομάτων οὐδεὶς λόγος αἱρεῖ ἀπολογήσασθαι ὑπὲρ τοῦ δεῖξαι ὅτι οὐδὲν πονηρὸν ἢ αἰσχρὸν ἢ ἀκάθαρτον ἢ μιαρόν ἐστιν ἐν τοῖς τῶν προφητῶν λόγοις.