Edition Masquer
Contra Celsum

23.

Ἡμεῖς δὲ τὰ περὶ τοῦ ἡμετέρου Ἰησοῦ ἀπὸ τῶν προφητικῶν δεικνύντες καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο παραβάλλοντες τὴν περὶ αὐτοῦ ἱστορίαν ταῖς περὶ ἐκείνων ἱστορίαις <δείξομεν> ὅτι οὐδεμία τούτου φέρεται ἀκολασία. Οὐδὲ γὰρ αὐτοὶ οἱ ἐπιβουλεύοντες αὐτῷ καὶ ζητήσαντες κατ' αὐτοῦ «ψευδομαρτυρίαν» κἂν πιθανότητα εὗρον εἰς τὴν κατ' αὐτοῦ «ψευδομαρτυρίαν», ἵν' ἀκολασίας ἕνεκεν αὐτοῦ κατηγορήσωσιν· ἀλλὰ καὶ ὁ θάνατος αὐτοῦ ἐξ ἐπιβουλῆς ἀνθρώπων γέγονε καὶ οὐδὲν ὅμοιον ἔσχε τῷ πρὸς τὸν Ἀσκληπιὸν κεραυνῷ. Τί δὲ σεμνὸν ἔχει ὁ μαινόλας Διόνυσος καὶ γυναικεῖα περιβεβλημένος, ἵν' ὡς θεὸς προσκυνηθῇ; Ἐὰν δὲ καὶ οἱ περὶ τούτων ἀπολογούμενοι ἐπὶ ἀλληγορίας καταφεύγωσιν, ἰδίᾳ μὲν ἐξεταστέον τὰς ἀλληγορίας, εἰ τὸ ὑγιὲς ἔχουσιν, ἰδίᾳ δέ, εἰ δύνανται ὑπόστασιν ἔχειν καὶ ἄξιοι εἶναι σεβασμῶν καὶ προσκυνήσεως σπαραττόμενοι ὑπὸ Τιτάνων καὶ καταβαλλόμενοι ἀπὸ τοῦ οὐρανίου θρόνου. Ὁ δ' ἡμέτερος Ἰησοῦς ὁ ὀφθεὶς τοῖς ἰδίοις θιασώταις – χρήσομαι γὰρ τῷ παρὰ τῷ Κέλσῳ ὀνόματι – ὤφθη μὲν κατ' ἀλήθειαν, συκοφαντεῖ δὲ τὸν λόγον ὁ Κέλσος λέγων αὐτὸν ὦφθαι σκιάν. Καὶ συνεξεταζέσθω γε τὰ τῶν περὶ ἐκείνων ἱστοριῶν τῇ περὶ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ. Ἢ ἐκεῖνα μὲν βούλεται ὁ Κέλσος εἶναι ἀληθῆ, ταῦτα δὲ ἀναγραφέντα ὑπὸ τῶν τεθεαμένων καὶ τῷ ἔργῳ δειξάντων τὴν ἐνάργειαν τῆς καταλήψεως περὶ τοῦ τεθεωρημένου καὶ παραστησάντων τὴν διάθεσιν ἐν οἷς προθύμως ὑπὲρ τοῦ λόγου αὐτοῦ πεπόνθασιν εἶναι πλάσματα; Καὶ τίς ἂν κατὰ τὸ εὔλογον πάντα πράττειν θέλων ἀποκληρωτικῶς συγκαταθοῖτο μὲν <τοῖς> περὶ ἐκείνων εἰς δὲ τὰ περὶ τούτου ἀνεξετάστως ὁρμῶν ἀπιστήσαι τοῖς περὶ αὐτοῦ;

Traduction Masquer
Origen Against Celsus

Chapter XXIII.

But we, in proving the facts related of our Jesus from the prophetic Scriptures, and comparing afterwards His history with them, demonstrate that no dissoluteness on His part is recorded. For even they who conspired against Him, and who sought false witnesses to aid them, did not find even any plausible grounds for advancing a false charge against Him, so as to accuse Him of licentiousness; but His death was indeed the result of a conspiracy, and bore no resemblance to the death of AEsculapius by lightning. And what is there that is venerable in the madman Dionysus, and his female garments, that he should be worshipped as a god? And if they who would defend such beings betake themselves to allegorical interpretations, we must examine each individual instance, and ascertain whether it is well founded, ¹ and also in each particular case, whether those beings can have a real existence, and are deserving of respect and worship who were torn by the Titans, and cast down from their heavenly throne. Whereas our Jesus, who appeared to the members of His own troop ² --for I will take the word that Celsus employs--did really appear, and Celsus makes a false accusation against the Gospel in saying that what appeared was a shadow. And let the statements of their histories and that of Jesus be carefully compared together. Will Celsus have the former to be true, but the latter, although recorded by eye-witnesses who showed by their acts that they clearly understood the nature of what they had seen, and who manifested their state of mind by what they cheerfully underwent for the sake of His Gospel, to be inventions? Now, who is there that, desiring to act always in conformity with right reason, would yield his assent at random ³ to what is related of the one, but would rush to the history of Jesus, and without examination refuse to believe what is recorded of Him? ⁴