7. There is yet one place more, which I must take notice of before I leave this article.

* After this he insinuates, that the worship paid to Anti‘nous, one of the beloved favourites of Adrian, at Antinopo‘lis in Egypt, differs not from the respect which we have ‘ for Jesus. Another instance this of his hatred of us ! “But what have we in common with men, whose manners ‘ are so vicious, as not to be exempt from that effeminacy ‘ which is contrary to nature ? What comparison can be * made between them, and the venerable Jesus, whom we ‘ follow, against whom, though innumerable lies and calum‘ nies have been forged, none have dared to charge him with “any kind of intemperance whatever?”


Remarks upon the Work of Celsus against the christians, and upon Origen's Answer to it.

CELSUS says, “he” knows all things.” Which Origen treats as a very arrogant saying; but I think the coherence shows, that Celsus intended to say, he knew all things relating to the christians. And perhaps he meant no more, than that he was well qualified for the work he had undertaken, of writing against them; and Origen himself,” in some other places where he takes notice of this saying, leads us to understand it of his being well acquainted with the christian affairs.

Which, I apprehend, cannot be disallowed; for Celsus had read the books of Moses, and perhaps all the other books of the Old Testament. He had read, as it seems, all the books of the New Testament; but when he had done that, he supposed, he needed not to give himself much trouble about any of them, excepting the historical books, and particularly the gospels.

* T Yap kowov syst 5 yewogsvoc ev roug Aéptava trauðuroic 8toc, 80s rov aftsva atta&m Yuvaikstag voca ovXašavroc, trpoc row aspivov judov Ingev, a pumés of uvpta karmyopmoavrsc, rat bevón Öga tript avre Asyovreg, Čečvvmvrat karstretv, &c kgv to rvXov axoMaguac kav st' oxyov Yevgaposve. L. 3. sect. 36. p. 132. * Askreov Čs trpoc ta, Travra yap ouda, a\aćovikorata vir' avre atroreroNumplevov, L. i. Sect. 12. p. 11. " 'O Tavr' stöeval strayyst\apsvog Kogog Ta sluerspa. L. i. Sect. 40. p. 31. Ov Yap pèst 6 axm00c axačov KeMoog, kat strayyoopsvoc stösvat travra ra xptstavov. L. ii.

sect. 32. p. 80.

He had also made inquiries after those absurd people called heretics, and looked into some of their writings. Beside all this, he had sent for some Jews to come to him, with whom he had a good deal of discourse. Froin them he learned their expectation of the Messiah, and their idea of him; by them he endeavoured to inform himself, wherein lay the controversy between the Jewish people and the christians; with their assistance he formed divers objections against the christian doctrine; and from them, undoubtedly, he aimed to pick up all the scandal which they could furnish him with against the christians; and from them he received the infamous account of our Saviour’s nativity, before taken notice of. And it may be well supposed, that there were some reasons, which induced this learned Epicurean to take so much pains to inform himself about the christians, and then to write a large volume against them. Their principles were very different from his, and contrary to all the established notions about the heathen deities ; and their principles had already gained great ground, and were still spreading more and more to the detriment of Epicurism, and all idolatrous schemes; which could not but move his indignation. We see his resentments in the bitterness with which he has treated the christians, and Jesus himself, whom they followed as their Lord and Master. I am unwilling to insinuate, that Celsus was allured into this service, and that he encouraged himself with hopes of success in his design, by the afflictive circumstances of the christians at that time; but I must say, it was not very generous in him to attack and oppose them in the manner he did, when they were under persecution, and liable to capital punishments. Celsus' expressly quotes the Dispute or Dialogue of Papiscus and Jason, and speaks of it with great contempt, of which I took notice" formerly. It is a work which may be allowed to be written by a catholic christian. Excepting that one book, I do not recollect that Celsus has mentioned the name of any of our celebrated ancient christians, or particularly referred to any of their writings; though there were several before, and about his time, who might have been mentioned; as Clement of Rome, Ignatius bishop of Antioch, Polycarp bishop of Smyrna, Quadratus, Aristides, Justin Martyr, Tatian, not to speak of any others, divers of whom were well versed in Greek literature; which silence

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

about them may be ascribed to a scornful disdain, unwilling to do justice to the merit of a christian; nor do we perceive from Origen, that Celsus had named any of the evangelists. And by the way I would observe here, that we compute the Dialogue of Papiscus and Jason to have been written about the year of Christ 140; Celsus, therefore, could not publish his work against the christians till after that time. At the conclusion of his eight books in answer to Celsus, Origen observes, that" Celsus promised another work, in which he would show men how to live. This work Origen seems to suppose to have been likewise designed in opposition to christianity. Origen did not know whether Celsus had performed his promise ; but he desires his friend Ambrose to send it to him, if he had met with it; and he engageth to examine it. Origen’s own work, as before shown, has been greatly commended. Eusebius, entering upon his own answer to Hierocles, considers it as a needless performance; forasmuch as a confutation of him may be seen in Origen's books against Celsus, who had already said every thing that could be said upon the subject. I do not judge it proper for me to indulge myself in any characters that should be reckoned extravagant; nevertheless I think I may say, that Origen's eight books against Celsus are an invaluable treasure. Every one is now able to judge of the importance of the fragments of the work of Celsus, preserved in it. Origen's answers to Celsus are also valuable. There are likewise many other things, of which good use may be made; whence the curious may learn divers things hardly to be met with elsewhere. I suppose, I shall hereafter have opportunities for verifying this observation, by quotations out of it.


The Recapitulation.

IT is a large extract which I have now made out of Origen’s eight books against the work of Celsus, entitled The True Word: it is fit that we should now recapitulate what we have seen in several articles.

* Igói pisyrot strayyáXopsvov row K&Norov ax\o ovvrayua puera reto troumosuw, sv to Čučašew strmyyet\eto, öTm {3torsov rac {33}\ous vac avrò kat Övvaueva t. yy Q t p.

trsiósg0at. L. viii. Sect. 76, p. 428. f Contr. Hier. p. 511.

And it is a great deal. All these things have we seen in Celsus distinctly and clearly. What greater advantage could we expect from the writings of an adversary, who flourished, and wrote not long after the middle of the second century of the christian epoch; and not much above 130 years after our Saviour's ascension ? In the passages alleged under the second" section we have seen good proofs that the Jewish people had expectations of that great person the Messiah. In the passages cited under the third section, we have seen many plain references to the gospels, and to several of St. Paul's epistles, if not also to St. Peter's and St. John's. We are assured by Celsus, that there were histories of Jesus written by his disciples, meaning his apostles and their companions; and that those books were well known, and in high esteem with christians. We have seen in his fragments plain references to the gospels of St. Matthew, St. Luke, and St. John ; it appears also highly probable, or even certain, that he was not unacquainted with the gospel according to St. Mark; but he has not expressly mentioned the books themselves, nor the names of the writers; nor is there so much as an insinuation, that the later christians, of Celsus's own time, or thereabout, had forged these histories to do honour to Jesus. He only says, that they had altered some things; but of that he produced no proof; nor did he allege any particular instances; he only says, in the place referred to, if Origen has taken the words of Celsus exactly, ‘ that some of the be‘lievers had taken the liberty to alter the gospel from the ‘ first writing.’ I presume I have now particularly shown, from numerous passages above alleged, the truth of St. Chrysostom's observation : ‘That Celsus bears witness to the antiquity of “our writings.” .* And, as it was in those times a common method to quote authors in a loose manner, and as it is reasonable to believe that Celsus was far from being scrupulously exact in his citations of christian books, or in his allusions to them; it may be well reckoned somewhat extraordinary, that we can discern in him so many evident traces of quotations from the books of the New Testament, or references to them. In the fourth section are many passages of Celsus bearing testimony to the books of the New Testament, and the facts contained in them.

* The first section is not recapitulated here, as it contains only the history of Celsus, and his work.

He lets us know that Jesus was the author of the christian institution, and that he had lived and taught not very long ago. We learn from him also, that according to the accounts given by his disciples, he was born of a virgin, in a small village of Judea, supposed to have been descended from the Jewish kings; that she was married to a carpenter; that for some while her husband was doubtful about her chastity; that Chaldeans, or other wise men from the east, came to Jerusalem, soon after his nativity, to do him homage as king of the Jews, having been excited to that journey by the appearance of a star; that Herod, moved by jealousy, put to death many young children, hoping to kill Jesus with them; that by direction of an angel, he was carried by his parents into Egypt for the preservation of his life; where, as Celsus insinuates, Jesus learned the charms practised in that country. He calls Jesus the Nazarean man, or man of Nazareth, from the place where he was brought up, and chiefly resided, before his appearance in a public character. He takes notice of our Lord's baptism, and of the descent of the Holy Spirit in the shape of a dove, and of a voice from heaven declaring Jesus to be the beloved Son of God. In another place he speaks again of a like voice from heaven, which seems to be what happened when our Lord was transfigured on the mount. He afterwards takes notice, that when Jesus appeared in a public character, as a teacher of religion, he went about attended by ten or eleven disciples, publicans, and sailors, or mariners, as he generally calls them. In the history of Jesus, written by his disciples, he is said to have healed the lame and the blind, and to have raised some dead persons to life: and though he is unwilling to allow that these were real miracles done by the power of God, he dares not to deny their truth, and is troubled to account for them, and was almost reduced to the necessity of allowing the power of magic, though he is supposed to have formerly written against it. He has taken notice of our Lord's death on the cross, and almost all the circumstances of his last sufferings: that he was betrayed by one of his disciples, and denied by another: that he was condemned by a judge, and prosecuted by the Jews. He mentions our Lord's deriders, and the reproaches he underwent, the crown of thorns, the purple robe, the reed in his hand. Nor has he omitted the wine mingled with gall, when our Lord was going to be crucified, and the vinegar, when he was near expiring on the cross. He also takes notice of the darkness during our Lord’s crucifixion, and the earthquake at the

« 上一页继续 »