a Celsus here evidently refers to our gospels, and allows the histories of our Lord, in which those miracles are recorded, to have been written by his disciples:' and he knew, that those works were esteemed proofs that he was the Son of God. Upon which Origen observes: You see,' says he, that Celsus in a manner allows there is such a thing as magic; though, possibly, he is the same who wrote several books against magic.' Origen speaks modestly: but I think it very probable, that he is the same person. Moreover Origen here answers very well, that whatever things were performed by the jugglers, whom Celsus speaks of, were not done for the reformation of mankind, nor to form in them the fear of God, or other virtues: which was the great design of the life of Jesus: who did not perform great works to be wondered at; but that the men of that and future times, might be induced by his doctrine and example, to live well, and aim to please God in whatever they do.' с d 13. He asks us,' says Origen, by what reasons are ye induced to think him the Son of God?" And he makes us answer: "because we know his death was undergone for the de⚫struction of the parent of evil." And soon after: Here he makes us answer him, "that we therefore have thought him to be the Son of God, because he healed the lame, and the blind, and, as you say, raised the dead.” 6 To which Origen makes this glorious answer: Undoubtedly, we do think him to be the Christ, and the Son of God, because he healed the lame, and the blind: and we are the more ⚫ confirmed in this persuasion by what is written in the prophecies. "Then shall the eyes of the "blind be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall hear, and the lame man shall leap as an hart." • Is. xxxv. 5, 6. But that he also raised the dead, and that this is not a fiction of those who ' wrote the gospels, is evident hence: That if it had been a fiction, there would have been many recorded to be raised up, and such as had been a long time in their graves. But it not being a fiction, few have been recorded: for instance the daughter of the ruler of a synagogue; (of whom I do not know, why he said: "she is not dead, but sleepeth :" expressing something peculiar to her, not common to all dead persons :) and the only son of a widow, on whom he had compassion, and raised him to life, after he had bid the bearer of the corpse to stop and the third, Lazarus, who had been buried four days.' Witsius, quoting the words of Celsus above cited, in a dissertation upon our Saviour's miracles, observes, that many learned men have understood Celsus to allow, that Jesus had healed the blind, and the lame. But,' he says, he apprehends, that these words do not represent what Celsus allowed, but what Christians affirmed.' It appears to me somewhat difficult to determine, whether Celsus believed those great works of our Lord, or not. But it is not easy to see, how he could disbelieve them and he was at a loss how to account for them. And, as Origen observed: You see, how in a manner 'he allows, that there is such a thing as magic.' I think Celsus could not, or would not allow our Lord's great works to have been done by the power of God, because he would not admit the consequence, which was, that Jesus had a divine commission, and acted by authority from heaven and rather than admit that just and necessary conclusion, he has recourse to shifts and evasions, which are absurd and inconsistent. As Origen says, As Origen says, Celsus 'not being able directly 'to deny the great works which Jesus is recorded to have done, asperseth them, and calls them 'juggling tricks." However, we learn from Celsus, that Christians did then believe Jesus to be the Son of God, because he had healed the lame and the blind, and raised the dead: and because after this, he had voluntarily submitted to death for the destruction of sin, or of Satan and his works. And may we not now appeal to all mankind, if those Christians did not act very rationally,in believing Jesus to be the Christ, the Son of God, provided they had but good ground for the truth and tror, si, ingenuitati litans, et ne juniores in fraudem inducantur, integrum Origenis contextum describam. L. ii. contra Cels. p. 87. Cantabr. Quibus verbis contineri videtur, non quod Celsus dat, sed quod Christiani assumunt. Cæterum perinde nobis est, quid Celsus vel negaverit, vel fuerit fassus. Diss. vi, § xxiii. ap. Melitern. p. 372, 373. * Πολλακις δ' ὁ Κελσος ηδη μη δυναμενος αντιβλέπειν αἷς αναδεΓραπίαι, πεποιηκεναι δυναμεσιν ο Ιησος, διαβάλλει ανίας ὡς γοητείας. Γ. ii. § 48. p. 87. reality of the great works ascribed to him? as they certainly had, and it is well shewn by Origen in the passage before quoted. 14. Still it may be expected, that I should take some notice of the insinuation which we met with some while ago, that Jesus, when he was in Egypt, might learn some charms and magical powers, whereby he obtained an ability to perform some works, that should appear surprising. To which it has been already well answered by learned Christian writers: How should Jesus learn magic in Egypt, when he was yet an infant, and not much more than two 'years of age? and if he had learned that art in his childhood, how came it to pass that he 'performed not any wonderful works before he was thirty years of age? To which might be added, that it is beyond the power of magic to perform such works as were done by Jesus.' This objection has been considered, and well answered by Grotius. I need only transcribe a part of what he says, referring my readers to the rest. • That Jesus was in Egypt, is known only from the writings of his disciples, who also say, that he returned thence when he was ⚫ still an infant. And if in the time of Christ and his apostles, there had been in Egypt, or any 'where else, any magical art, by which the blind might be made to see, the lame to walk, the 'dumb to speak, and all kinds of maladies might be healed on a sudden, as they were by Jesus Christ; the emperors Tiberius and Nero, and others, who were very curious and inquisitive,' 'would have spared no cost to obtain it.' 15. The Jew goes on: "How should we take him for a God, who, as we have understood, performed none of those things which were promised? [that is, as I apprehend, did not accomplish the worldly deliverance which the Jews expected.] But when we had judged him guilty, and would bring him to punishment, though he shamefully hid himself, and fled away, yet was taken, being betrayed by those whom he called his disciples. But it became not a 'God to flee, nor to be taken, and executed; least of all did it become him to be deserted and betrayed by his companions, who knew all his secrets, who followed him as their master, who ' esteemed him a Saviour, and the Son and messenger of the Most High God." This passage assures us of many things, agreeable to the gospels which we now have, and from which Celsus manifestly takes his accounts, whilst he endeavours to form conclusions to the disadvantage of Jesus. This passage, then, assures us, that the Jews disliked Jesus, because he did not answer their carnal expectations: that he met with unkindness from his disciples; by one of whom he was betrayed, and by the rest forsaken: that the Jews plotted against Jesus, and that he was taken and put to death by them. But what Celsus insinuates, that Jesus absconded, is false. He was apprehended, and died voluntarily; though he had at sometimes retired for safety, "his hour not being yet come:" and the garden, in which he was apprehended, was a place whither he often went with his disciples. We learn also, that the Christian accounts of that time were (agreeable to our gospels), that the disciples had conversed intimately with Jesus, and that they owned him for their master, and Saviour, and the Son and messenger of the great God. We learn, finally, that the cross of Christ was matter of offence and scandal with many. 16. He then finds fault with the disciples, as if it were their fiction, that he foresaw and 'foretold the things which befell him. But that this is true, we can shew, whether Celsus will or not for we can allege many other things foretold by our Saviour, which happened to the Christians his followers in after times.. Who can forbear to admire these words: "And ye "shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake, for a testimony to them and the gentiles?" Matt. x. 18. For if any men were to be brought before governors and kings for their doctrine, who should be more likely than the Epicureans, who deny a Providence?—————— diisse Tum vero, si Christi et ejus discipulorum tempore; And who, that shall in his mind place himself near Jesus, must not wonder when he hears him " say: "And this gospel shall be preached in the whole world, for a testimony to them, and to the gentiles." [Matt. xxiv. 14.] And yet it has been fulfilled: and the gospel of Jesus Christ has been preached to all men under heaven, Greeks and Barbarians, wise and unwise for the word preached with power has subdued all mankind: nor is there any sort of men that has refused to accept of the doctrine of Jesus. And let the Jew in Celsus, who denies that Jesus 'foresaw what would happen to himself, consider, how it should come to pass, that when Je'rusalem was standing, and the Jewish worship was performed there in all its splendour, Jesus ⚫ should foretell all that would happen to it from the Romans. Nor can they say, that the disciples preached the doctrine of the gospel by word of mouth only, and did not deliver to their disciples any written memoirs concerning Jesus: but in them it is written: "When ye shall "see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know, that the desolation thereof is nigh.' Luke xxi. 20. There were then no armies near Jerusalem, to surround it, and besiege it: that first began to be done under Nero, and continued to Vespasian, whose son Titus levelled Jerusalem with the ground.' b a 17. But Celsus says, that the disciples of Jesus, the thing being too manifest to be dcnied by them, have bethought themselves to say, that he foreknew all these things.But they are very weak in thinking to vindicate Jesus by writing these things of him. As if one should affirm a man to be righteous, and shew him to be wicked: say, he is a good man, and shew that he has committed murder: say, he is immortal, and shew him dead: [This last is the point which he is arguing: the other instances are only for illustration ;] prefacing, however, continually, that he foreknew all these things. For neither do you say, that he seemed to wicked men to suffer these things, when he did not suffer; but you openly and expressly say, that he did suffer.' It is certain, then, that Jesus died; otherwise his disciples would not have related it: and it is as certain, that he foretold both his death and his resurrection. And it may deserve to be taken notice of, that the Christians of that time, with whom Celsus argued, did not say, that Jesus only seemed to die, or seemed to suffer; but, that he really suffered, and died. His attacks, therefore, were made upon the sounder part of the Christians, not upon Docetæ, or any such like men. 18. What god, or dæmon, or wise man, who foreknew that such things were to happen to ' him, would not have avoided them, if he could, and not fall under the evils he foresaw?" We learn hence, that the disciples' account of Jesus was, that he foreknew his sufferings, and that he suffered, and died, as we now see in our gospels: and we may observe, that whereas some while ago Celsus pretended, the disciples had been deceived by Jesus, now he makes them designing men, who had contrived to say, that Jesus knew all these things.' And whereas just now he insinuated, that Jesus had fled, and absconded, but nevertheless was apprehended; here he endeavours to shew the absurdity of coming in the way of sufferings that had been foretold. So that, after all, the account in the gospels, written by the disciples, was, as now, that Jesus had voluntarily submitted to the sufferings which he had foreseen: in which there is no absurdity. Origen reminds Celsus of Socrates, and other wise men, who underwent sufferings which they could have avoided. 19. The Jew in Celsus still goes on, saying more foolish things. "If he foretold who should betray him, and who should deny him; how came it to pass, that they did not fear him as a God? so that the one should not dare to betray him, nor the other to deny him? But they 'betrayed him, and denied him: so little did they regard him." Here are more references to some of the material facts and circumstances attending the sufferings of Jesus, as recorded in our gospels; and they are all easily accounted for. Judas, the traitor, was a wicked, covetous man; and acted against his light and conviction. Peter, who denied Jesus, was exceedingly shocked by our Lord's being apprehended, and was overcome by fear, so as to disown his relation to Jesus. However, Judas soon afterwards was so sensible of the greatness of his guilt, as to fall into despair: and Peter soon after bewailed his weakness with many tears. So long as these facts which Celsus cavils at are in the gospels, they will be thought credible a L. ii. § 15. p. 69. L. ii. § 16. p. 70. © L. ii. § 17. p. 71. L.i.§ 18. p. 71, 72, histories they who put down such things, so disadvantageous to themselves, or their friends, and seemingly so dishonourable to Jesus himself, their Lord and Master, did not forge a story to aggrandize him, or themselves: but they wrote the truth impartially, without fear or favour; as is admirably shewn by Origen in this context. 20. How frivolous and manifestly false is what Celsus says, that never any man betrayed ' another man with whom he sat at table: and how much less would any man, who was so fa'voured by a God, betray him ?' Origen treats this remark with indignation, and calls it a falsehood; there being many instances of such things, both among Greeks and Barbarians. It seems to me, that Celsus here not only argues from the intimacy of Christ and the disciples, but intends also to use some of the very expressions of the evangelists. Luke xxii. 21. "But behold the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table.' And see John xiii. 26 and 28. b 21. But Celsus has pushed this argument still farther which, perhaps, ought not to be omitted by me. It was God, says he, who foretold these things; therefore there was a ne⚫cessity that they should come to pass. God therefore compelled his own disciples and prophets, with whom he ate and drank, to be wicked and abominable, for whose welfare above all others he ought to have been concerned. Never did man betray another with whom he sat at table. Here he who sits at table with God betrays him: and, which is still worse, God himself lays snares for those who sit at table with him, making them impious traitors.' To which Origen answers. Celsus thinks, that what has been foretold, comes to pass be'cause it has been foretold: to which we can by no means assent, For we do not say, that he * who foretold something future, is the cause of its coming to pass: but whatever is future will come to pass, though it was not foretold: and therefore he who has the gift of foreknowledge 'foretels it.' d 22. If he thought fit to undergo such things, and if in obedience to the Father he suf fered death; it is apparent, that they could not be painful and grievous to him, he being a God, and consenting to them. Why then does he lament, and bewail, and pray, that the fear of destruction may be removed, saying to this purpose: "O Father, if it be possible, let 'this cup pass away." Matt. xxvi. 39. Here Origen observes, that Jesus is not said in the gospels to bewail.' But we plainly see, that Celsus had our gospels before him: and in them Jesus is represented suffering in obedience to the Father, himself willing, and consenting thereto. And yet he prayed, that "the cup "might pass from him." I need not stay to shew the consistence of these things. с 23. Why did he not now at last, [when condemned] if not before, deliver himself from this ignominy, and do justice upon them, who reviled both him and his Father?' Referring to the reproaches, cast upon Jesus when hanging on the cross. Matt. xxvii. 39-44. Origen says, that the same answer will serve here, which is given by all others, who hold a divine providence, in answer to the objection, taken from God's not presently punishing wicked men. f 24. Celsus, as Origen says, selecting some passages out of the gospels, with a design to expose them, reproaches Jesus with "the gall and the vinegar, as if he was mighty eager to drink, and was not able patiently to endure thirst, which common people often bear con'tentedly." Celsus here plainly refers to Matt. xxvii. 34. They gave him vinegar to drink, mingled with gall. And when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink." He also as manifestly refers to John xix. 28-30. "After this-that the scripture might be fulfilled, Jesus saith: Ithirst." And when a spunge filled with vinegar was reached up to his mouth, it is said, he received the vinegar, and then said: "It is finished. And bowing his head, he gave up the ghost." So that Celsus, in this short passage, referred to St. John's account of the vinegar given to our Lord, at the conclusion of his crucifixion, as well as to the vinegar, and the gall, presented to him when they were going to crucify him upon Jesus. but in neither is there any just ground for reflections b 25. Celsus, in a rude and abusive manner, says: What difference can there be for a God to eat the flesh of lambs, and drink gall and vinegar, or to eat any other impurity?' It is likely, that Celsus here refers to our Saviour's eating the paschal lamb with the disciples. Origen answers: We do not say, that God ate the flesh of lambs: but Jesus, being clothed with a body, 'might eat it.' 26. But, says Origen, what the Jew in Celsus affirms, is a downright lie: That he was put to death, and suffered, having convinced no man in his life-time, not so much as his disciples.' It is, however, very true, that few believed in Jesus then, in comparison of them who believed in him afterwards. Celsus pretends, that the disciples did not believe in Jesus, because they forsook him in the time of his last sufferings. 27. They who conversed with him when alive, and heard his voice, and followed him as their master, when they saw him under punishment, and dying, were so far from dying with • him, or for him, or being induced to despise sufferings, that they denied they were his dis'ciples: but now-a-days you die with him.' Celsus here refers to the timorousness of the disciples, and particularly to Peter's denying Christ. It is no great wonder, that they were all greatly shaken at the sight of the sufferings of Jesus: which, at that time, they could be hardly induced to think should befall the Messiah. But they afterwards preached him boldly, with the hazard of all that is dear in this world; which shews, that they had good evidence of his resurrection from the dead: otherwise, they would never have resumed their courage. And as the disciples were afterwards undaunted in professing and preaching the name of Jesus; so the Christians in the time of Celsus were in the right to die with Christ, or for him, rather than deny him. Celsus seems to have had an eye to one or more texts of St. Paul's epistles: as 2 Tim. ii. 11, 12. "It is a faithful saying. For if we die with him, we shall also live with him:" and what follows. Celsus here bears testimony to the fortitude of the Christians in his time. It is manifest from this passage, that many did then die for Christ, rather than deny him: and it is not a little strange, that a learned man, a man of extensive knowledge and understanding, should ridicule, and make a jest of the grievous and unrighteous sufferings of innocent men, and of their patience under them. But so it was. Such was the contempt which was then the lot of the followers of Jesus. And Celsus having taken it into his head to enter into controversy with them, and thenceforward considering them as enemies, made no scruple to ridicule men, who, according to his own confession, were arrived at such exalted virtue, as 'to despise sufferings, and endure death patiently, rather than speak and act against conviction. 28. Having mentioned several Greek stories, generally, if not universally, allowed to be fables and fictions, Celsus says: But let us consider, whether any one that has really died, • ever rose again in the same body; unless you think, that the stories of others are indeed, as well as seem to be fables: whilst your fable is probable, and credible, because of his voice on the cross, when he expired, and the earthquake, and the darkness; and because that when he was living he could not defend himself, but after he was dead, he arose, and shewed the marks of his punishment, and how his hands had been pierced. But who saw all this? Why, a distracted woman, as you say, and one or two more of the same imposture, and some dreamers, who fancied they saw things as they desired to have them: the same that has hap'pened to innumerable people.' See Matt. xxvii. 50, 51. John xx. 10-18. The wonderful things attending the death of Jesus, here taken notice of by Celsus, his loud voice just before he expired, Matt. xxvii. 50. Mark xv. 37,39. Luke xxiii. 46. the earthquake, and |