Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

In another place Celsus has these words: “But" if he “[Herod] was afraid, that when you was come of age, you ‘should reign in his stead; why did you not reign when “you was of age? But so far from that, the Son of God ‘wanders about, cringing like a necessitous beggar.” Or, as some may choose it should be rendered: “'Skulking ‘ from place to place, as if he was afraid of being taken up.” These expressions are very irreverent; but they contain another testimony to the second chapter of St. Matthew’s gospel. 9." But" that it may not be suspected,” says Origen, ‘ that we pass by any chapters because we have no answer at hand; I have thought it best, according to my ability, to confute every thing proposed by him; not so much observing the natural order of things, but the order which he has taken himself. Let us see therefore what he says, denying that the Holy Spirit was seen by our Saviour in itle shape of a dove. It is the Jew, who still goes on, addressing himself to him, whom we own for our Lord. “You say, that when you was washed by John, there lighted upon you the appearance of a bird.” The Jew adds: “What 9 credible witness has said, that he saw this? or who heard the voice from heaven, declaring you to be the Son of God, excepting yourself, and, if you are to be credited, one other of those, who have been punished ‘like yourself.”” This passage bears testimony to many things recorded in the gospels: our Saviour's baptism by John ; that John, as well as our Saviour, had suffered a violent death; that according to the disciples of Jesus, who had written his history, when he was baptized, the Holy Ghost descended like a dove, and abode upon him; and there was a voice from heaven, declaring him to be the Son of God, or the Messiah. Celsus may have referred to several of the gospels, but, as it seems, more particularly to John i. 32, 33, “And John bare record, saying ; I saw the Spirit descending from heaven, like a dove, and it abode upon him.” And what follows. Origen's answer to this is prolix; toward the conclusion of which he says: ‘IP must add, that Celsus is mistaken,

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

‘when he thinks, that Jesus himself told these things, the “opening of the heavens, and the descent of the Spirit at ‘Jordan, in the shape of a dove; forasmuch as in no text of scripture it is related that he said this. , Nor did this great author consider, how little this suited him, who of the vision in the mount said to the disciples, “tell this vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen from the dead,” Matt. xvii. 9. It is not likely, that he who said this, should tell the disciples what had been seen and heard by John; and any may perceive from his whole life, how he declined speaking of himself. “If I bear witness of myself, [says he, my witness is not true,” John v. 31. He chose to show himself to be the Christ by his works, rather than by words; so far was he from boasting.’ 10. ‘Celsus' says, that Jesus, taking to himself ten or eleven abjects, vile publicans and sailors, went about with them, getting his subsistence in a base and shameful manner.” There is no doubt, that Celsus means the twelve disciples of Jesus, by whom he was usually attended: but he so much disliked the truth of the gospels, that he could not endure to put down the right number, though that be a point so indifferent : for the same reason, I suppose, he calls the disciples ‘sailors,” or mariners, instead of fishermen. Celsus gives ill language, and vilifies the disciples; but it does not appear, that he produced any instances of their wickedness. Publicans and sailors, or fishermen, are oftentimes bad men; but they are not all so. The original employments of the disciples show, that they were not men of much learning, or of great and wealthy families; but they might be very honest nevertheless. The more despicable they were, the more evidently does the success of the gospel, preached by them, appear to be owing to its truth and importance, and the power of God attending it. That Celsus produced no proof, nor credible account, that the disciples were bad men, is apparent; because Origen conjectures, he might found this character upon what is said of them in " the epistle of St. Barnabas, or else upon what St. Peter says to Christ, Luke v. 8, “Depart from me, O Lord, for I am a sinful man.” And though Jesus subsisted in a mean and humble manner, it was not shameful : but it is great and shameful perverseness, to censure the life of Jesus, who,

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

av0pwtrec, TsAwwag kat vavrag rag trovmporatec, puera rarwu Tučs kokstos avrov

atročeópaksval, atoxgwc kat YAtoxpog Tpopac ovvayovra. L. i. Sect. 62, p. 47. * Vid. Barnab. Ep. cap. v.

without external pomp and splendour, “went about doing good,” as it is justly said, Acts x. 38. And who was sometimes attended by thousands, whom he fed in desert places; who would have been his constant followers, with many others, if he would but have exerted his power for procuring to himself and them such worldly advantages, as they saw he was well able to do. 11. I must not omit, “ that" in another place the Jew in ‘Celsus says, Jesus set out with ten profligate publicans and sailors.” 12. “After this,” says Origen, ‘Celsus, well knowing what great works may be alleged to have been done by Jesus, pretends" to grant, that the things related of him are true, such as healing diseases, raising the dead, feeding multitudes with a few loaves, of which likewise large fragments were left, and whatever other things the disciples, who, as he thinks, delighted in strange things, have written. And then adds: Well, then, let us grant, that all these things were done by you. After which he instanceth in the tricks of Egyptians, and other impostors: and then asketh this question: Because they do such things, must we therefore esteem them to be God’s sons? or must we not rather say, that these are artifices of wicked and miserable men ‘’’ 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

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

6.

" 'Oru trapov čska vavrag kai Towvac rac séa)\esarec uovac {i\s. K. A. L. ii. Sect. 45. p. 86. * L. i. Sect. 68, p. 53. " ——orpoo trousitat avyxopsw axmón cival, Öo a rept 9spatsuov, n avagao'ewc, m rept aprwy 0\tywy Spellavrov troXAag avays ypattal, m 60a ax\a outral repaTsvoapévag tag pathyrag isopmksval, kat stripspot avroug" peps, artsevowputy fivat oot Tavr' supyaopsva. Ibid. " 'Opgg &c &a rerov otovst trapačextrat playstav čtvat' sk otóa si è avrog ww rip ypalavru kata playetaç (3/3\ta TAttova.

lbid. w Ibid.

‘ 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.’ 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 destruction of the parent of evil.” And soon after : ‘Here y he makes us answer him, “ that we there“fore have thought him to be the Son of God, because he * healed the lame and the blind, and, as you say, raised the • dead.” ” 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.”

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

* L. ii. sect. 47, p. 87. y ôrt Šta rar' evoutcaplew avrov stvat Yuovese, stret x0Xag kat rvpxec 80sparsvosv. IIpostômov Ós kat ro, tog ūpletc pars, avism vskpag. Ibid. Sect. 48, p. 87.

* Simile quid in Celso deprehendere visi sunt viri eruditissimi, ut qui consessus sit, Jesum coecos et claudos curavisse. Sed, ut verum fatear, dubitare licet, an non justo liberaliores hac in parte sint. Opera pretium me facturum esse arbitror, si, ingenuitatilitans, et me 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. Caeterum perinde nobis est, quid Celsus vel negaverit vel fuerit fassus. Diss. vi. sect. xxiii, ap. Melitem. p. 372, 373.

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, ‘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 reality of the great works ascribed to him 7 as they certainly had, and it is well shown 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 child‘ hood, how came it to pass that he performed not any “wonderful works before he was thirty years of age 3 To

* IIoMAakic 3’ & KeMoog møm um 8vvap.svoc avròAstrew oic avayeyparrat

Tetroincevat Övvapiégiv 6 Imaac, čvaga)\\st avrag Đc yon retag. L. ii. Sect. 4S. p. * See before, p. 225.

———opponimus Munsteri responsum--—“Et quomodo, quaeso, potu*isset puer, et infams duorum annorum, discere magiam Quod si in pueritiã * didicit artem illam, quare non fecit signa ante 30 vitae suæ annum ? Tunc ‘enim coepit coruscare miraculis. Sed numquid mortui possunt vivificari per * magicam virtutem, ut Jesus Christus fecit?' Wagens. Confutatio Toldos. Jeschu, p. 44

C

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »