Origen of Alexandria, Against Celsus

Now the Jews are not much acquainted with Greek literature; but suppose that there was a Jew so well versed in it (as to make such a quotation on his part appropriate), how (does it follow) that Jesus could not liberate Himself, because He did not do so? For let him believe from our own Scriptures that Peter obtained his freedom after having been bound in prison, an angel having loosed his chains; and that Paul, having been bound in the stocks along with Silas in Philippi of Macedonia, was liberated by divine power, when the gates of the prison were opened. But it is probable that Celsus treats these accounts with ridicule, or that he never read them; for he would probably say in reply, that there are certain sorcerers who are able by incantations to unloose chains and to open doors, so that he would liken the events related in our histories to the doings of sorcerers. “But,” he continues, “no calamity happened even to him who condemned him, as there did to Pentheus, viz., madness or discerption.”226 Cf. Euseb., Hist. Eccles., bk. ii. c. vii. And yet he does not know that it was not so much Pilate that condemned Him (who knew that “for envy the Jews had delivered Him”), as the Jewish nation, which has been condemned by God, and rent in pieces, and dispersed over the whole earth, in a degree far beyond what happened to Pentheus. Moreover, why did he intentionally omit what is related of Pilate’s wife, who beheld a vision, and who was so moved by it as to send a message to her husband, saying: “Have thou nothing to do with that just man; for I have suffered many things this day in a dream because of Him?”227 Matt. xxvii. 19. And again, passing by in silence the proofs of the divinity of Jesus, Celsus endeavours to cast reproach upon Him from the narratives in the Gospel, referring to those who mocked Jesus, and put on Him the purple robe, and the crown of thorns, and placed the reed in His hand. From what source now, Celsus, did you derive these statements, save from the Gospel narratives? And did you, accordingly, see that they were fit matters for reproach; while they who recorded them did not think that you, and such as you, would turn them into ridicule; but that others would receive from them an example how to despise those who ridiculed and mocked Him on account of His religion, who appropriately laid down His life for its sake? Admire rather their love of truth, and that of the Being who bore these things voluntarily for the sake of men, and who endured them with all constancy and long-suffering. For it is not recorded that He uttered any lamentation, or that after His condemnation He either did or uttered anything unbecoming.

Παίζων δ' ὡς οἴεται τὸν Ἰησοῦν ὁ παρὰ τῷ Κέλσῳ Ἰουδαῖος εἰδέναι ἀναγέγραπται τὸν Εὐριπίδου Βάκχον λέγοντα· Λύσει μ' ὁ δαίμων αὐτός, ὅταν ἐγὼ θέλω. Οὐ πάνυ μὲν οὖν Ἰουδαῖοι τὰ Ἑλλήνων φιλολογοῦσιν.Ἀλλ' ἔστω τινὰ τῶν Ἰουδαίων καὶ φιλόλογον οὕτω γεγονέναι· πῶς οὖν ὁ Ἰησοῦς, ἐπεὶ μὴ ἔλυσεν αὑτὸν δεδεμένον, οὐδὲ ἐδύνατο λῦσαι; Ἢ γὰρ ἐκ τῶν ἐμῶν γραφῶν πιστευέτω ὅτι καὶ Πέτρος δεδεμένος ἐν φυλακῇ ἀγγέλου λύσαντος τοὺς δεσμοὺς ἐξῆλθε, καὶ Παῦλος μετὰ τοῦ Σίλα ἐν Φιλίπ ποις τῆς Μακεδονίας ὑπὸ "ξύλον" δεδεμένος ἐλύθη θείᾳ δυνάμει, ὅτε καὶ "θύραι" τῆς φυλακῆς "ἠνοίχθησαν". Ἀλλ' εἰκὸς ὅτι ταῦτα γελᾷ ὁ Κέλσος ἢ καὶ οὐδαμῶς ἀνέγνω τὴν ἱστορίαν· ἔδοξε γὰρ ἂν λέγειν πρὸς αὐτὴν ὅτι καὶ γόητές τινες ἐπῳδαῖς δεσμοὺς λύουσι καὶ θύρας ἀνοίγουσιν, ἵνα κοινοποιήσῃ τὰ τῶν γοήτων πρὸς τὰ παρ' ἡμῖν ἱστο ρούμενα. Ἀλλ' οὐδ' ὁ καταδικάσας, φησίν, αὐτὸν ἔπαθέ τι, οἷον ὁ Πενθεὺς μανεὶς ἢ σπαραχθείς. Οὐκ εἶδε δ' ὅτι οὐχ οὕτω Πιλᾶτος ἦν καταδικάσας αὐτόν, ὅς γε "ᾔδει ὅτι διὰ φθόνον παρέδωκαν αὐτὸν" οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι, ὡς τὸ Ἰουδαίων ἔθνος· ὅπερ καταδεδίκασται ὑπὸ θεοῦ σπαραχθὲν καὶ εἰς πᾶσαν τὴν γῆν ὑπὲρ τὸν Πενθέως σπαραγμὸν διασπαρέν. ∆ιὰ τί δὲ καὶ ἑκὼν παρεπέμψατο τὰ περὶ τῆς γυναικὸς Πιλάτου, ἑωρακυίας ὄναρ καὶ οὕτω κεκινημένης ὑπ' αὐτοῦ, ὡς προσπέμψαι τῷ ἀνδρὶ καὶ λέγειν· "Μηδέν σοι καὶ τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ τούτῳ τῷ δικαίῳ· σήμερον γὰρ κατ' ὄναρ πολλὰ ἔπαθον δι' αὐτόν"; Πάλιν τε αὖ σιωπῶν τὰ ἐμφαίνοντα τὴν τοῦ Ἰησοῦ θειότητα ὁ Κέλσος ὀνειδίζει ἐκ τῶν γεγραμμένων ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ περὶ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ, παρατιθέμενος τοὺς ἐμπαίξαντας αὐτῷ καὶ φοινικίδα περιθέντας καὶ τὸν ἐξ ἀκανθῶν στέφανον καὶ τὸν ἐν τῇ χειρὶ κάλαμον. Πόθεν οὖν, ὦ Κέλσε, ταῦτα μεμάθηκας ἢ ἀπὸ τῶν εὐαγγελίων; Ἆρ' οὖν σὺ μὲν ἑώρας ταῦτα ὀνειδισμοῦ ἄξια, οἱ δ' ἀναγράφοντες αὐτὰ οὐ κατενόουν ὅτι σὺ μὲν καταγελάσῃ καὶ οἱ σοὶ παραπλήσιοι ἄλλοι δὲ παράδειγμα λήψονται τοῦ καταφρονεῖν γελώντων καὶ χλευαζόντων ἐπὶ εὐσεβείᾳ τὸν δι' αὐτὴν ἑτοίμως ἀποθανόντα; Μᾶλλον οὖν θαύμαζε αὐτῶν τὸ φιλάληθες καὶ τοῦ ταῦτα ἑκουσίως παθόντος ὑπὲρ ἀνθρώπων καὶ μετὰ πάσης ἀνεξι κακίας καὶ μακροθυμίας αὐτὰ ὑπομείναντος [τὸ γενναῖον]· οὐ γὰρ ἀνεγέγραπτο ὅτι ὠδύρατο ἤ τι ἀγεννὲς ἐκ τοῦ καταδεδικάσθαι ἐνόησεν ἢ ἀνεφθέγξατο.