Origen of Alexandria, Against Celsus

In what follows, some may imagine that he says something plausible against us. “If,” says he, “these people worshipped one God alone, and no other, they would perhaps have some valid argument against the worship of others. But they pay excessive reverence to one who has but lately appeared among men, and they think it no offence against God if they worship also His servant.” To this we reply, that if Celsus had known that saying, “I and My Father are one,”1784 John x. 30. and the words used in prayer by the Son of God, “As Thou and I are one,”1785 John xvii. 22. he would not have supposed that we worship any other besides Him who is the Supreme God. “For,” says He, “My Father is in Me, and I in Him.”1786 John xiv. 11, and xvii. 21. And if any should from these words be afraid of our going over to the side of those who deny that the Father and the Son are two persons, let him weigh that passage, “And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul,”1787 Acts iv. 32. that he may understand the meaning of the saying, “I and My Father are one.” We worship one God, the Father and the Son, therefore, as we have explained; and our argument against the worship of other gods still continues valid. And we do not “reverence beyond measure one who has but lately appeared,” as though He did not exist before;1788 [See note infra, cap. xxvi. S.] for we believe Himself when He says, “Before Abraham was, I am.”1789 John viii. 58. Again He says, “I am the truth;”1790 John xiv. 6. and surely none of us is so simple as to suppose that truth did not exist before the time when Christ appeared.1791 [ἡ τῆς ἀληθείας οὐσία: see Neander’s History of the Church, vol. ii. pp. 282, 283; also note supra, book vi. cap. lxiv. p. 603. S.] We worship, therefore, the Father of truth, and the Son, who is the truth; and these, while they are two, considered as persons or subsistences, are one in unity of thought, in harmony and in identity of will. So entirely are they one, that he who has seen the Son, “who is the brightness of God’s glory, and the express image of His person,”1792 Heb. i. 3. has seen in Him who is the image of God, God Himself.

∆όξαι δ' ἄν τις ἑξῆς τούτοις πιθανόν τι καθ' ἡμῶν λέγειν ἐν τῷ· Εἰ μὲν δὴ μηδένα ἄλλον ἐθεράπευον οὗτοι πλὴν ἕνα θεόν, ἦν ἄν τις αὐτοῖς ἴσως πρὸς τοὺς ἄλλους ἀτενὴς λόγος· νυνὶ δὲ τὸν ἔναγχος φανέντα τοῦτον ὑπερθρη σκεύουσι καὶ ὅμως οὐδὲν πλημμελλεῖν νομίζουσι περὶ τὸν θεόν, εἰ καὶ ὑπηρέτης αὐτοῦ θεραπευθήσεται. Λεκτέον δὲ καὶ πρὸς τοῦτο ὅτι, εἴπερ νενοήκει ὁ Κέλσος τὸ "Ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν" καὶ τὸ ἐν εὐχῇ εἰρημένον ὑπὸ τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ ἐν τῷ "Ὡς ἐγὼ καὶ σὺ ἕν ἐσμεν", οὐκ ἂν ᾤετο ἡμᾶς καὶ ἄλλον θεραπεύειν παρὰ τὸν ἐπὶ πᾶσι θεόν. "Ὁ γὰρ πατήρ", φησίν, "ἐν ἐμοί, κἀγὼ ἐν τῷ πατρί". Εἰ δέ τις ἐκ τούτων περισπασθήσεται, μή πῃ αὐτομολῶμεν πρὸς τοὺς ἀναιροῦντας δύο εἶναι ὑποστάσεις, πατέρα καὶ υἱόν, ἐπιστησάτω τῷ "Ἦν δὲ πάντων τῶν πιστευσάντων ἡ καρδία καὶ ἡ ψυχὴ μία", ἵνα θεωρήσῃ τὸ "Ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν". Ἕνα οὖν θεόν, ὡς ἀποδεδώκαμεν, τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὸν υἱὸν θεραπεύομεν, καὶ μένει ἡμῖν ὁ πρὸς τοὺς ἄλλους ἀτενὴς λόγος, καὶ οὐ τὸν ἔναγχός γε φανέντα ὡς πρότερον οὐκ ὄντα ὑπερθρησκεύομεν. Αὐτῷ γὰρ πειθόμεθα τῷ εἰπόντι· "Πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγώ εἰμι" καὶ λέγοντι· "Ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ ἀλήθεια"· καὶ οὐχ οὕτως τις ἡμῶν ἐστιν ἀνδράποδον, ὡς οἴεσθαι ὅτι ἡ τῆς ἀληθείας οὐσία πρὸ τῶν χρόνων τῆς τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐπιφανείας οὐκ ἦν. Θρησκεύομεν οὖν τὸν πατέρα τῆς ἀληθείας καὶ τὸν υἱὸν τὴν ἀλήθειαν, ὄντα δύο τῇ ὑποστάσει πράγματα, ἓν δὲ τῇ ὁμονοίᾳ καὶ τῇ συμφωνίᾳ καὶ τῇ ταυτότητι τοῦ βουλήματος· ὡς τὸν ἑωρακότα τὸν υἱὸν ὄντα "ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης" καὶ χαρακτῆρα "τῆς ὑποστάσεως" τοῦ θεοῦ ἑωρακέναι ἐν αὐτῷ ὄντι εἰκόνι τοῦ θεοῦ τὸν θεόν.