Against Celsus 6.25–6.40

In it there was a drawing of circles, ten of them separate from one another but bound together by one circle, which was said to be the soul of the universe and was named Leviathan; the Jewish Scriptures, whatever they may be hinting at, said that he was formed by God as a plaything. For in the Psalms we find: “You made all things in wisdom; the earth was filled with your creation. This is the great and wide sea; there ships pass through, small creatures with great ones; this is the dragon you formed to sport with.” In place of “dragon” the Hebrew had Leviathan. The impious diagram, then, said that this Leviathan, who is so plainly condemned in the prophet, is the soul that has pervaded the universe. We also found in it the one named Behemoth, placed as it were below the lowest circle. The man who fabricated that abominable diagram wrote this Leviathan on the circle and at its centre, setting down his name twice. Further, Celsus says that the diagram was divided by a thick black line, and he said that he was told this was Gehenna, which is also Tartarus. But finding Gehenna written in the Gospel as a place of punishment, we inquired whether it was named anywhere in the ancient writings, especially since the Jews too use the name. We found that in one place Scripture speaks of the Valley “of the son of Ennom,” and we have learned that in the Hebrew, in place of “Valley,” the same thing was called both the Valley of Ennom and Gehenna. And studying the readings closely we find that Gehenna, or the Valley of Ennom, is listed in the lot of the tribe of Benjamin, in which Jerusalem also was. And examining the connection between the existence of a heavenly Jerusalem and the lot of Benjamin and the Valley of Ennom, we find something bearing on the doctrine of punishments, since souls of such a kind are taken to be purified through torment, according to the saying: “Behold, the Lord comes in like a refiner's fire and like fullers' soap; and he will sit refining and purifying as gold and as silver”

and according to the saying that punishments take place around Jerusalem for those who are refined, who have taken into the very substance of their soul the things that come from wickedness, which is somewhere called, figuratively, lead; that is why in Zechariah lawlessness sat upon “a talent of lead.” But all that might be said on this subject is neither for everyone nor for the present occasion. Nor is it without danger to commit the clear explanation of such things to writing, since the many need no further teaching than that about the punishment of sinners. For it is not useful to go beyond this, because of those who are barely restrained, even by fear of eternal punishment, from at least some of the flood of wickedness and the sins that come from it. So neither the diagram nor Celsus knows the teaching about Gehenna; for otherwise those people would not make much of pictures and diagrams as though they presented the truth by them, nor would Celsus, in his treatise against Christians, have put among his accusations against Christians things that are in no way said by Christians but by some people who perhaps no longer even exist, having entirely died out and dwindled to a very few who can easily be counted. And just as it is not the business of those who follow Plato's philosophy to make a defence for Epicurus and his impious doctrines, so it is not ours to defend what is in the diagram and what Celsus says against it. Therefore we leave aside what Celsus said about these matters as superfluous and pointless; for we would accuse those who are held by such teachings more than Celsus does.

Next, after the matters of the diagram, Celsus, without even having half-heard anything about what churchmen call the seal, sets out certain strange ideas of his own and a dialogue of question and answer, in which the one who applies the seal is called father, and the one being sealed is called young man and son and answers: “I have been anointed with white ointment from the tree of life,” something we have not heard happens even among the sects. Then he also fixes a number said by those who hand on the seal: seven angels standing on either side of the soul as it departs from the body, some of light and others of those called archontic; and he says that the ruler of those called archontic is called an accursed god. Then, seizing on the phrase, he reasonably accuses those who dare to say this; and for this reason we too share the indignation of those who blame such people, if indeed there are some who call the God of the Jews accursed, the God who sends rain and thunder, the Creator of this world, the God of Moses and of the creation he describes. But Celsus seems to have intended something by this that was not fair-minded but, from his unphilosophical hatred of us, utterly unfair. For he wished to make those unacquainted with our teachings, when they read his book, fight against us, as though we called the good Creator of this world an accursed god. And he seems to me to have done something like the Jews who, at the beginning of the teaching of Christianity, spread slander against the faith, saying that Christians sacrifice a child and partake of its flesh, and again that those of the faith, wishing to do the works of darkness, put out the light and each has intercourse with whatever woman is at hand. This slander, absurd as it is, long ago prevailed over a great many people, persuading those outside the faith that Christians are like this; and even now it still deceives some, who are turned away by such things from coming even to simple conversation with Christians.

Celsus seems to me to have set out some such thing deliberately, that Christians say the Creator is an accursed god, so that anyone who believed him when he said this against us might, if possible, even be moved to kill Christians as the most impious of all. Confusing matters, he also sets out the reason why the God of the creation according to Moses is called accursed, saying that he is such and deserves a curse, according to those who hold these opinions about him, because he cursed the serpent that brought the knowledge of good and evil to the first human beings. But he ought to have known that those who have taken the serpent's side, as though it gave good advice to the first human beings, outdoing the Titans and Giants of myth, and are for this reason called Ophites, are so far from being Christians that they accuse Jesus no less than Celsus does, and do not admit anyone to their assembly until he has pronounced curses against Jesus. See, then, how utterly unreasonable Celsus has been in his books against Christians, treating as Christians those who do not even wish to hear the name of Jesus, not even that he was a wise man or a person of moderate character. What could be more foolish or more mad, not only than those who wished to take their name from the serpent as the author of good things, but also than Celsus, who thought the accusations against the Ophites were accusations against Christians? Long ago the philosopher of the Greeks who loved simplicity and set out an example of a happy life, showing that he was not hindered from happiness by complete poverty, called himself a Cynic; but these impious men, as though they were not human beings, whose enemy the serpent is, but serpents, pride themselves on being called Ophites after the serpent, the most hostile and horrible of creatures to men, and boast of a certain Euphrates as the founder of their impious teachings.

Then next, reviling and accusing, as though they were Christians, those who called the God of Moses and of his law accursed, and thinking that those who say this are Christians, Celsus says: What could be more foolish or more mad than this senseless wisdom? For what mistake did the lawgiver of the Jews make? And how is it that you take his account of the creation of the world, or the Jewish law, for yourself by what you call a figurative allegory, and yet, most impious man, praise unwillingly the Creator of the world, who promised them everything, who announced that he would increase their race to the ends of the earth and would raise them from the dead with the same flesh and blood, and who inspired the prophets; and then again you revile him? But when you are pressed hard by them, you admit that you worship the same God; yet when your teacher Jesus and the Jews' Moses legislate contrary things, you look for another God instead of this one and the Father. Here too the most noble philosopher Celsus plainly slanders Christians, saying that the same people, when the Jews press them, acknowledge the same God as they, but when Jesus legislates contrary to Moses, look for another in his place. For whether we are discussing with Jews or are by ourselves, we know one and the same God, whom the Jews too worshipped of old and profess to worship now, and we are in no way impious toward him. Nor do we say that God will raise men from the dead with the same flesh and blood, as was said above; for we do not say that what is sown “in corruption” and “in dishonour” and “in weakness,” the “natural body,” rises such as it was sown. But we have spoken on these matters adequately above.

Then next he takes up again the matter of the seven ruling demons, who are in no way named by Christians but are, I believe, accepted by the Ophites. And in the diagram which we too acquired because of them we found the order set out in the same way as Celsus set it out. Celsus said that the first is shaped in the form of a lion, without stating what these truly most impious people call him; but we found that the angel of the Creator who is honoured in the sacred Scriptures is the one that abominable diagram said was Michael, the lion-shaped. Again Celsus said that the next, the second, is a bull; the diagram we had said that the bull-shaped one was Suriel. Then Celsus said the third was an amphibious creature hissing horribly; the diagram said the third was Raphael, the serpent-shaped. Again Celsus said that the fourth had the form of an eagle; the diagram said that the eagle-shaped one was Gabriel. Then Celsus said that the fifth had the face of a bear; the diagram said that the bear-shaped one was Thauthabaoth. Then Celsus said that the sixth is recorded among them to have the face of a dog; the diagram said that he was Erathaoth. Then Celsus said the seventh had the face of an ass and was named Thaphabaoth or Onoel; but we found in the diagram that he is called Onoel or Thartharaoth, being ass-shaped. We too thought it right to set out these things precisely, so that we may not seem ignorant of what Celsus professed to know, but may show that we Christians know these things more precisely than he, and know that they are not the teachings of Christians but of people wholly estranged from salvation, who in no way acknowledge Jesus as Saviour or God or Teacher or Son of God.

If anyone wishes to learn also the fictions of those sorcerers, by which they wished to draw people to their teaching as though they possessed some secrets, but were not at all able to, let him hear what they are taught to say after passing through what they call “the barrier of wickedness,” the gates of the archons bound for ever: “I greet the solitary king, the bond of blindness, heedless forgetfulness, the first power, guarded by the spirit of providence and by wisdom; from here I am sent pure, already a part of the light of Son and Father. Grace be with me; yes, Father, let it be with me.” And they say that the beginnings of the Ogdoad are from here. Then next they are taught to say, as they pass through the one they call Ialdabaoth: “And you, Ialdabaoth, first and seventh, born to rule with confidence, being the ruling word of a pure mind, a perfect work for Son and Father, I bring a symbol marked with the imprint of life, and open to the world the gate that you closed for your age; I pass by your authority free again. Grace be with me; yes, Father, let it be with me.” And they say that the star Phainon (Saturn) is in sympathy with the lion-shaped archon. Then they think that the one who has passed through Ialdabaoth and reached Iao must say: “And you, ruler of the hidden mysteries of Son and Father, shining by night, second Iao, and first lord of death, portion of the innocent, bearing now my own beard as a symbol, I pass by your dominion, ready; having prevailed by the living word over the one born of you. Grace be with me; Father, let it be with me.” Then next comes Sabaoth, to whom they think they will say: “Ruler of the fifth authority, sovereign Sabaoth, advocate of the law of your creation, which is undone by grace, by a mightier pentad, let me pass, seeing an unblemished symbol of your art, preserved by the image of an imprint, a body undone by the pentad. Grace be with me; Father, let it be with me.” After him comes Astaphaeus, to whom they believe they will say such things: “Ruler of the third gate, Astaphaeus, overseer of the first source of water, looking upon one who is an initiate, let me pass, purified by the spirit of a virgin, seeing the being of the world. Grace be with me; Father, let it be with me.” After him comes Ailoaeus, to whom they think they should say such things: “Ruler of the second gate, Ailoaeus, let me pass, bringing you a symbol of your mother, grace hidden by the powers of the authorities. Grace be with me; Father, let it be with me.” Last they name Horaeus and think they should say to him: “You who fearlessly crossed the barrier of fire, who received the rule of the first gate, Horaeus, let me pass, seeing the symbol of your power undone by the imprint of the tree of life, taken in the image, after the likeness, of the innocent. Grace be with me; Father, let it be with me.”

Celsus's supposed wide learning, which is rather meddlesome curiosity and nonsense, has led us on to these matters, since we wish to show anyone who reads his book and what we have written against it that we are not at a loss about the lore Celsus uses to slander Christians, who neither hold nor know such things; for we too wished to know these things and to set them out, so that the sorcerers may not, by professing to know something more than we do, deceive those who are carried away by the impressiveness of names. I could have added a great deal more to show that we know the teachings of the deceivers but reject them as foreign and impious and incompatible with the truly Christian doctrines which we confess even to death. One should know, however, that those who composed these things, understanding neither magic nor the divine Scriptures, mixed everything together. From magic they took Ialdabaoth, Astaphaeus, and Horaeus; from the Hebrew Scriptures, the one named Iao among the Hebrews, Sabaoth, Adonaeus, and Eloaeus. But the names taken from the Scriptures are titles of one and the same God. Not understanding this, the enemies of God, as they themselves admit they are, supposed that Iao was one, Sabaoth another, a third besides him Adonaeus, whom the Scriptures call Adonai, and another Eloaeus, whom the prophets name in Hebrew Eloai.

Then next Celsus sets out other myths, about some people returning to the archontic forms, so that some become lions, others bulls, others serpents or eagles or bears or dogs. We also found in the diagram we had what Celsus called the square figure, and what those wretched people say about the gates of paradise. The flaming sword was painted as the diameter of a fiery circle, as though it were guarding the tree of knowledge and the tree of life. Celsus either did not wish or was not able to set out the speeches which, according to the myths of the impious, those who pass through each gate will make; but we have done this too, in order to show Celsus and the readers of his book that we know the end of this rite which is no rite, and know it as foreign to the piety of Christians toward God.

After setting out what we have quoted and things similar to what we added, Celsus says this: And they add still more on top of this, words of prophets, and circles upon circles, and emanations of an earthly church and of circumcision, and a power flowing from a certain virgin Prunicus, and a living soul, and heaven slain that it may live, and earth slain with a sword, and many slain that they may live, and death ceasing in the world when the sin of the world dies, and again a narrow way down, and gates that open of themselves. And everywhere there is the tree of life, and a resurrection of the flesh from the tree, because, I suppose, their teacher was nailed to a cross and was a carpenter by trade. So that if he had happened to be thrown from a cliff, or pushed into a pit, or strangled by a noose, or had been a cobbler or a stonemason or a blacksmith, there would be a cliff of life above the heavens, or a pit of resurrection, or a rope of immortality, or a blessed stone, or iron of love, or holy leather. What old woman, humming a story to lull a child to sleep, would not have been ashamed to whisper such things? In this, it seems to me, Celsus is jumbling things he half-heard. For it is likely that if he heard some little phrase of any sect whatever, without making it clear even according to that sect's meaning, he strung the scraps of words together and paraded them before those who know nothing either of our teachings or of those of the sects, as though he knew everything about Christians. The passage before us makes this plain.

For to use the words of prophets is our practice, since we show that Jesus is the Christ proclaimed beforehand by them and demonstrate from the prophetic writings that what is recorded about Jesus in the Gospels was fulfilled. To speak of circles upon circles perhaps belongs to the sect mentioned above, which encloses the seven circles of the archons in one circle, which they say is the soul of the universe and Leviathan. Or perhaps it is a misunderstanding of Ecclesiastes, who says: “Circling, circling goes the wind, and on its circles the wind returns.” Emanations of an earthly church and of circumcision were perhaps taken from what some say, that the church on earth is an emanation of a heavenly church and a higher age, and that the circumcision written in the law is a symbol of a circumcision that took place there in some purification. The followers of Valentinus, in accordance with their own misguided wisdom, give the name Prunicus to a certain Wisdom, of whom they would have the woman with a flow of blood for twelve years be a symbol. Having misunderstood this, the man who jumbles together everything of Greeks and barbarians and sects said: “a power flowing from a certain virgin Prunicus.” The living soul perhaps is spoken of in secret by some of the followers of Valentinus with reference to what they call “the psychic Creator”; or perhaps the living soul, in contrast to the dead soul, is spoken of by some, not ignobly, as the soul of one who is being saved. But I do not know of heaven being called slain, or earth slain with a sword, or many slain that they may live; and it is not unlikely that Celsus made these up himself.

As for death ceasing in the world when the sin of the world dies, we might say this ourselves, expounding the mystical saying of the apostle, which runs: when “he has put all enemies under his feet,” then “the last enemy, death, is destroyed.” It is also said: “When this corruptible puts on incorruption,” “then shall come to pass the saying that is written: Death is swallowed up in victory.” A narrow way down again perhaps those who introduce the transmigration of souls will speak of. And it is not unlikely that gates opening of themselves are spoken of by some who interpret figuratively the saying: “Open to me the gates of righteousness, that I may enter by them and give thanks to the Lord; this is the gate of the Lord; the righteous shall enter by it.” And again in the ninth Psalm it is said: “You who lift me up from the gates of death, that I may declare all your praises in the gates of the daughter of Zion.” The word says that the gates “of death” are the sins that lead to destruction, just as, conversely, the “gates of Zion” are good actions; and so also “gates of righteousness,” which is equivalent to “the gates of virtue”; and these are readily opened to the one who pursues virtuous actions. As for the tree of life, someone will discuss it more appropriately when interpreting what is recorded in Genesis about the paradise planted by God. Celsus has often mocked the resurrection, which he did not understand; but now, not content with what he has said, he says that a resurrection of the flesh from the tree is spoken of, having misunderstood, I think, the symbolic saying that through a tree came death and through a tree life: death in Adam, life in Christ. Then, making fun of what concerns the tree, he mocks it from two sides, saying that it is brought in for this reason, either because our teacher was nailed to a cross or because he was a carpenter by trade. He does not see that the tree of life is recorded in the writings of Moses, nor does he notice that nowhere in the Gospels current in the churches is Jesus himself described as a carpenter.

He supposes also that we, interpreting the cross figuratively, invented the tree of life; and, consistently with his own error about this, he says that if that man had happened to be thrown down a cliff, or pushed into a pit, or strangled with a noose, there would have been invented a cliff of life above the heavens, or a pit of resurrection, or a rope of immortality. And again he says that if the tree of life had been invented because he was a carpenter, it would have followed that, had he been a cobbler, something would be said about holy leather; had he been a stonemason, about a blessed stone; had he been a blacksmith, about iron of love. Who, then, does not at once see the cheapness of his accusation, as he reviles people whom he professed to convert as being deceived? Next he says things that fit those who invented the lion-shaped, ass-headed, and serpent-shaped archons, and anyone who has told similar myths to theirs, but not those of the Church. For truly even a drunken old woman, lulling a child to sleep, would have been ashamed to sing and whisper to the child such a myth as those who invented the ass-headed archons and the speeches, so to call them, at each gate. But Celsus does not know the teachings of those of the Church, which very few have trained themselves to understand, those who have devoted their whole life, according to Jesus' commandment, to searching “the Scriptures,” and have laboured over the investigation of the meaning of the sacred writings more than the Greek philosophers laboured to acquire some supposed knowledge.

Not content with what came from the diagram, the fine fellow wished, to increase his accusations against us, who have nothing in common with it, to add some other things in between, repeating what belongs to those people as though it were ours. For he says: A marvel of theirs, and not the least, is this: they explain certain things written between the upper circles above the heavens, among others two in particular, a greater and a smaller, of Son and Father. We found in this diagram the greater circle and the smaller, on whose diameter was written “Father and Son”; and between the greater, in which the smaller was, and another made up of two circles, the outer yellow and the inner blue, the barrier inscribed in the shape of an axe. Above it was a small circle joined to the greater of the first two, with “Love” written in it; and below, touching the circle, one with “Life” written in it. In the second circle, which was intertwined with and enclosed two other circles and another rhomboid figure, was written “Providence of Wisdom”; inside their common section, “Nature of Wisdom”; above their common section was a circle in which “Knowledge” was written, and below another in which “Understanding” was written. We have included these things too in our book against Celsus, to show readers that we know more clearly than he, and not from things half-heard, the things that we too condemn. If those who pride themselves on such things also profess some magical sorcery, and this is for them the sum of wisdom, we do not affirm it, for we have not found out any such thing. But Celsus, who has often been caught already in false witness and unreasonable accusations, would know whether he is lying here too, if he found such a thing about certain people who are strangers and aliens to the faith and set it out in his treatise.

Then, against those who, as he says, use a kind of magic and sorcery and invoke barbarous names of certain demons, he says such things, that these people act like those who tell marvels about the same beings to those who do not know that their names are different among the Greeks and among the Scythians. Then he sets out, taking it from Herodotus, that the Scythians call Apollo Gongosyrus, Poseidon Thagimasadas, Aphrodite Argimpasa, and Hestia Tabiti. Anyone who is able will examine whether here too Celsus, along with Herodotus, is not mistaken, since the Scythians do not understand the same things as the Greeks about those whom they consider gods. For what likelihood is there that Apollo is called Gongosyrus among the Scythians? For I do not think that Gongosyrus, translated into Greek, gives the etymology of Apollo, or that Apollo in the Scythian language means Gongosyrus. Nor will one say the same about the rest: for the Greeks named those they considered gods starting from certain things and etymologies, the Scythians from others, and likewise the Persians from others, and the Indians or Ethiopians or Libyans from others, or as each chose to name them, since they did not remain in the first and pure conception of the Creator of the universe. We have said enough on this earlier too, when we wished to show that Sabaoth and Zeus are not the same, and quoted something from the divine writings about languages. So we willingly pass over these things, in which Celsus calls us to repeat ourselves. Then again, jumbling together matters of magical sorcery, and attaching them perhaps to no one, since there are no sorcerers who practise under the pretext of this form of piety, or perhaps to some who use such things with the easily deceived so as to seem to do something by divine power, he sets out certain things, saying: Why need I list all those who have taught purifications, or releasing songs, or averting cries, or rattlings, or demonic figures, or all kinds of protective remedies made of clothes or numbers or stones or plants or roots, and in general of every sort of thing? Reason does not require us to answer for these, since we are not in the least involved in such suspicions.

After this he seems to me to do something like those who, out of great hatred of Christians, assure people who know nothing of Christian teaching that they have found out by experience that Christians eat the flesh of children and freely have intercourse with the women among them. For just as these charges are now condemned, even by the many who are wholly strangers to our religion, as slanders against Christians, so these statements of Celsus too would be found to be slanderous, where he said that he had seen among certain presbyters of our faith barbarous books containing names of demons and marvels; and he said that these men (so-called presbyters of our faith) promise nothing good but everything for the harm of men. I wish that everything Celsus says against Christians were of this sort, so that it might be refuted by most people, who have learned by experience that such things are false, since they have lived among very many Christians and have never even heard anything of the kind about them.