ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS***


Transcribed from the 1812 J. Smith edition by David Price, email
ccx074@pglaf.org

                              HULSEAN ESSAY
                               _For_ 1811.

                                * * * * *





                                    A
                               DISSERTATION
                                  ON THE
                   BOOKS _of_ ORIGEN _against_ CELSUS,
                               WITH A VIEW
                        TO ILLUSTRATE THE ARGUMENT
                                   AND
                    POINT OUT THE EVIDENCE THEY AFFORD
                                  TO THE
                          TRUTH OF CHRISTIANITY.


                                * * * * *

_Published in pursuance of the Will of the Rev._ J. HULSE, _as having
gained the_ ANNUAL PRIZE, _instituted by him in the University of
Cambridge_.

                                * * * * *

                                    BY
                           FRANCIS CUNNINGHAM,
                           OF QUEEN’S COLLEGE.

                                * * * * *

    “Quippe in his (_nimirum Origenis contra Celsum libris_) communem
    Christianorum doctrinam, adversus instructissimum Religionis nostræ
    hostem propugnat: hi summo Auctoris studio maxima eruditione,
    elucubrati fuere.”  _Bull._ _Def._ _Fid._ _Nic._ Cap. ix. Sec. 2.

                                * * * * *

                                CAMBRIDGE:
           PRINTED _by_ J. SMITH, PRINTER _to the_ UNIVERSITY;
       _AND SOLD BY DEIGHTON_, _CAMBRIDGE_; _AND RIVINGTONS_, _AND_
                          _HATCHARD_, _LONDON_.

                                * * * * *

                                  1812.

                                * * * * *

                                  TO THE
                   _Very Rev. the_ DEAN _of_ CARLISLE,
                        PROFESSOR OF MATHEMATICS,
                              THE PRESIDENT,
                                   AND
                      _To the Reverend and Learned_
                               THE FELLOWS
                          _OF QUEEN’S COLLEGE_,
                                THIS ESSAY
                               IS DEDICATED
                 AS A TRIBUTE OF RESPECT AND GRATITUDE BY
                               THE AUTHOR.

                                * * * * *




CONTENTS.

                                        Page
Introduction                               1
                  CHAP. I.
History and Writings of the Jews           5
                 CHAP. II.
The Scriptures                            12
                 CHAP. III.
History of Christ                         19
                 CHAP. IV.
Miracles                                  24
                  CHAP. V.
Character of the early Christians         33
                 CHAP. VI.
Doctrines of the early Christians         39
                 CHAP. VII.
Conclusion                                49




INTRODUCTION.


THE Book of Celsus, {1a} entitled “The True Discourse,” {1b} is supposed
to have been written during the fifth persecution, {1c} in the reign of
Marcus Antoninus, and in the one hundred and seventieth year of the
Christian era.  Of his history nothing is known, but that he was an
epicurean philosopher, {1d} and a friend of Lucian, who inscribed a book
{1e} to him.  The object of his work was an attack upon Christianity, and
as such, it is one of the most malignant and unreserved upon record.  He
is indebted to his opponents for bringing down any account of his
writings to posterity, for they have otherwise perished.

Origen died in the year of our Lord {2a} two hundred and fifty-four.  He
undertook, at the request of Ambrose, {2b} to answer the work of Celsus,
and “to leave no part without examination.”  His Treatise is divided into
eight books; but this division seems rather to be founded upon caprice,
{2c} than upon any design of methodically discussing the argument.  The
reasonings of Celsus are discussed in the order in which they occur,
which is without method, or connection.  The extracts which are made by
Origen from the works of his adversary are very copious, so much so,
that, considering his object, of fully discussing every part of the
original work, it is probable nothing of importance is omitted.  The
accuracy of the quotations of Origin is guaranteed both by his
acknowledged veracity, {3a} and by the risk of refutation to which he
would otherwise have exposed himself, from opponents who had the original
writing in their hands.  The work of Origen has been considered both by
ancients and moderns, as a master-piece of eloquence and argument.
Eusebius {3b} and Jerome {3c} have given it their highest approbation.
Many of our own writers, {3d} and many more of the French, {3e} both
Catholic and Protestant, have pronounced it to be the completest, and
best written apology for the Christian Religion which has been bequeathed
to us by the ancients.

The want of order, both in the attack of Celsus, and the reply of Origen,
renders it impracticable to follow, precisely in their steps.  Time will
be gained, and perspicuity promoted, by endeavouring to bring their
perplexed argument into a more regular form.  We shall therefore single
out the main topics discussed by each, and by stating the objections of
the one, and the replies of the other, strive to collect the evidence
which each furnishes to the truth of Christianity.  Taking the more
prominent topics therefore, we shall consider in order; the History and
Writings of the Jews—the Scriptures—the History of Christ—the Conduct and
the Principles of the early Christians.  After which it will be useful to
sum up the evidence to Christianity, supplied by the whole argument.




CHAP. I.
HISTORY _and_ WRITINGS _of the_ JEWS.


THE evidence in favour of Christianity, to be deduced from the history
and writings of the Jews, is so important, that it was a primary object
with Celsus, to render it nugatory.  This he endeavours to effect, first,
by disputing the antiquity of Moses; and secondly, by condemning his
narration.  We shall examine his statement on these points, and some
important acknowledgments he makes, of the existence of the prophetic
writings.

He says that “the Jews, {5a} who were originally fugitive slaves from
Egypt, pretended, on the authority of the Books of Moses, to a very
ancient genealogy; {5b} that they lived together in a corner of
Palestine, in profound ignorance; {5c} not having heard of the things
long before celebrated by Hesiod, and many other men divinely inspired.”
He then particularizes much of the history of Genesis, which he calls “an
old woman’s story, full of impiety;” {6a} and asserts that “many of its
facts are taken from the heathens.”  To this Origen {6b} replies by
referring to Josephus {6c} and Tatian {6d} for external proof of the
history of the Jews: He affirms that they have all the evidence of their
existence which other nations have, {6e} that they have records which
others have not; {6f} that other nations are allowed to have existed who
bear testimony to the Jews; {6g} that it would have been impossible for
so small a band, to have opposed itself to the whole power of Egypt; that
it must have changed its language; and that, in changing, it has not
assumed one resembling the neighbouring nations.  He then urges the
wisdom of the Jewish Institutions; infers from their perfect
preservation, the esteem in which they were held; and challenges a
comparison, {7a} as to sublimity of doctrine, and purity of morals, with
any other system, proposed to mankind.

Celsus then notices many of the Old Testament characters: He ridicules
the relation of “the Fall, {7b} the Deluge, Children born of old Persons,
Brothers who kill each other, Mothers who deceive, the Sin of Lot, the
Animosity of Esau, the Deceit of the Sons of Jacob, the History of
Joseph,” &c.  Origen replies that such facts alone are selected by Celsus
from the writings of Moses, as supply a ground of attack; that the
simplicity of his narration proves the integrity of its author; and he
then apologizes for these causes of offence by the necessity of the case,
he contrasts with them the greater profligacy of the heathen, or
fancifully explains them upon the scheme of allegory.

No direct admission of Celsus, relating to Jewish prophecy, is to be
found.  There are however many observations, which prove the coming of
Christ to have been expected by the Jews, and this expectation must have
been the result of prophecy.  The remarks of Celsus, with regard to this
topic, are of this kind.  That the “Jews {8a} and Christians believe,
that the Spirit of God had promised there would come a Saviour; but they
could not agree, whether or no, he had already come;” {8b} that “the
prophecies which the Christians apply to Christ refer equally to other
persons;” {8c} that “others had lived who had applied the prophecies of
Christ to themselves,” &c. &c.  Thus he plainly admits prophecies to have
existed of some great person, who was to come; and that Jews and
Christians believed in them, but that it was uncertain whether they were
accomplished.

The inferences to be collected from the preceding observations, are as
follows.

First, The Jewish Scriptures are of older date, than the birth of Christ.
For if these writings had been compiled since that time, some rumours of
such an event must have reached Celsus; and this fact which would have
ruined all the pretensions of Jewish antiquity, would have been urged by
the heathens as a primary objection to their claims.  The Jews themselves
moreover could not have been deceived, if this had been a cunningly
devised fable; for they were a widely extended people, and in so short a
space of time, it would have been impossible to make them the dupes of
such an imposture.  Secondly, It may be inferred from the admission of
Celsus, that the prophecies were found in the Jewish Scriptures _in his
time_; and _since_ then no alteration has been made in them by the Jews.
But if so, this is the strongest presumption, that the Jews had never
altered them _before_.  For, if, when by the fulfilment of the
prophecies, in the person of Christ, they were most tempted to erase
predictions, so hostile to their own creed, they made no change, much
less, would they do it, when the temptation was diminished.  Thirdly, If
little is to be collected from the writings of Celsus, in favour of those
prophecies which he has attacked, something may be inferred in favour of
those which he has failed to attack.  Their existence is admitted, and
his spirit of hostility is such, that we must attribute his silence not
to his forbearance, but to his disingenuousness.  Fourthly, The admission
that some important character was expected, not only by the Jews, but by
the heathens, at the era of Christ’s advent, is very important to
religion.  Where could the expectation originate, except in the Jewish
Scriptures?  The sages, poets, and historians of antiquity, appear to
have drunk at this sacred source.  The Arabians {10a} came from a far
country to greet it; Herod destroyed {10b} the Jewish genealogies that
the family of David might not be known, {10c} undertook the building of
the temple, a work it was thought the Messias was to perform, and
murdered {11a} his own son in fear that the promised King should dethrone
him.  Virgil, building upon the popular persuasion, applied it on two
occasions to Augustus. {11b}  This expectation is also mentioned by
Cicero, {11c} Sallust, {11d} Suetonius, {11e} and Tacitus. {11f}  If the
origin of this expectation was with the Jews, where else can we look for
the accomplishment.  Who has fulfilled their wide-spread expectations?
Where is this hope of all nations to be sought, if not in the person of
Christ?




CHAP. II.
THE SCRIPTURES.


CELSUS in his general mode of argument against the Christians, renders a
very important testimony to the truth of their Scriptures: for his
charges are not grounded on facts or doctrines, not there recorded; but
almost every one of them may be directly traced, to some important and
obvious passage of the Bible.

He seemed therefore to consider, that he could most effectually destroy
Christianity, by overturning the authority of the writings which the
Christians believed to have been delivered to them by inspiration, and
which they considered the authority, the guide and the security of their
religion.

He acknowledges {13a} that there were “writings concerning the affairs of
Christ made by his disciples;” using the word _disciple_ distinctly from
the _follower_ of Christ, and plainly in the sense of the immediate
attendant upon his person.  Whence may be inferred the general belief, in
his time, that the Gospels proceeded from their accredited authors.

He states the Christians to have “preached their doctrines to the poor
and wicked, without partiality or respect of persons;” {13b} a statement
admitted by Origen, to be conformable to the genius of the Gospel, and
fulfilling its own declarations, “that to the poor the Gospel is
preached;” {13c} and that “Christ came not to call the righteous, but
sinners to repentance.” {13d}  This statement also proves the Gospel to
have been publicly promulged.

He charges the Christians with so “mutilating the Scriptures, that if one
expression was attacked they might take refuge in another;” {14a} but the
charge rests alone upon his assertion.  Origen confidently challenges any
proof of it; imputes the mutilations of Scripture, exclusively, to
Marcion and Valentinus; but denies their claim to the title of
Christians.

The quotations of Celsus from the New Testament are so numerous, {14b}
that from them a great part of the History of Christ, a statement of his
doctrines, his character, and that of his disciples, might be gathered.
These quotations are taken from the Gospels, in general, but more
particularly from Saint Matthew, from the Acts of the Apostles, from the
various Epistles of St. Paul, St. Peter, and St. John.  They are so
faithful a transcript of our New Testament, as to leave no doubt, that he
had it before him.  Now and then, however, he mutilates passages, as if
to show the contempt in which he held the whole relation.  Thus in
mentioning the disciples of Christ, he says, “that he took ten or eleven
abjects, vile publicans and sailors.” {15}  This error is plainly one,
rather of contempt, than of ignorance.

It is also worthy of notice, that Celsus has taken very few stories from
the heretical writings, which assumed to themselves equal authority with
the Gospels, and which abounded in his days.  These stories, wherever
they occur, are disallowed by Origen, and their authors, at once, given
up as uninspired.  The concessions of Celsus may be taken in evidence,
that the canon of Scripture was already so well established, that it
would have been in vain for him to mis-state it.

The general testimony furnished by Origen to the Scriptures, may be
viewed in some degree distinctly from that of Celsus.  It must be
considered as coming about fifty years after. {16a}  In this work he
quotes from twenty-nine books of the Old Testament, {16b} from all but
three in the New, {16c} and from five books of the Apocrypha. {16d}  His
quotations agree very accurately with our Text, and many passages, which
since have been disputed, {16e} are held by him as authentic.  He allows
no objection to lie against the plenary inspiration of Scripture; he
indeed admits {16f} some differences to have existed, as to the
interpretation of passages, but adverts to none respecting their
authority.

Origen frankly avows the _difficulties_ of Scripture; and it is to cut
his way through these, that he is tempted to employ the weapon of
allegorical interpretation; a weapon, which never fails to wound the hand
of the employer, and to injure the cause it is designed to serve.  His
rashness in this method of interpretation may be estimated by the
following specimen. {17a}  “O daughter of Babylon, who art to be
destroyed; happy shall he be that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us.
Happy shall he be, who taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the
stones.” {17b}  “The little ones, the children of Babylon,” he says, “are
to be interpreted vexatious thoughts, the offspring of confusion, which
vice has produced; and he who is happy in dashing them against the
stones, is he, who crushes these thoughts against the solidity of
reason.”  Such excesses, whilst they betray the unsoundness of an
expositor of Scripture, evince his faith in its authority: and it is
rather the authority of the text, than the universal sobriety of its
interpreters, which we are anxious to defend.




CHAP. III.
HISTORY OF CHRIST.


THE attack of Celsus, upon the History of Christ, maybe arranged under
the three divisions, of his birth; his life; his death.

In adverting to the birth of Christ, Celsus introduces a Jew, charging
Christ with being privately born {19a} in a little village of Judea, his
mother being driven out by the Carpenter, to whom she was bet