Hortatory Address to the Greeks 28–38

And not only Plato but Homer too, having likewise learned it in Egypt, said that Tityus is punished in the same way. For thus in the calling-up of the dead Odysseus recounts to Alcinous, saying: "And I saw Tityus, glorious son of Earth, lying on the ground; and he lay stretched over nine plethra; and two vultures, sitting on either side, were tearing at his liver." For it is plain that it is not the soul but the body that has a liver. In the same way he wrote that Sisyphus and Tantalus too undergo punishment with the body. That Homer was in Egypt, and transferred into his own poetry many things he learned there, Diodorus, the most renowned of historians, teaches us sufficiently. For he said that when he was in Egypt he learned that Helen took the drug nepenthe, which soothes grief and anger and makes one forget all ills, from Polydamna the wife of Thon, and brought it to Sparta; and Homer said that Helen, using that drug, stopped the lament that arose at Menelaus's house in the presence of Telemachus. And he named Aphrodite "golden" from the history in Egypt; for he knew of a precinct in Egypt called that of golden Aphrodite, and of a plain named the plain of golden Aphrodite. And for what reason has this been mentioned now? To show that the poet transferred into his own poetry many things also from the divine history of the prophets. And first the beginning of the making of the world, spoken by Moses; for Moses wrote thus: "In the beginning God made the heaven and the earth," then the sun and the moon and the stars. Having learned these things in Egypt, and pleased with what Moses wrote on the coming-to-be of the world, he had Hephaestus make on the shield of Achilles, as it were, an image of the making of the world. For he wrote thus: "On it he made the earth, and the heaven, and the sea, and the tireless sun and the full moon, and on it all the constellations with which heaven is crowned." And he made the garden of Alcinous preserve an image of paradise, representing it in the image as ever-blooming and full of fruits. For he wrote thus: "There tall trees grow, flourishing, pears and pomegranates and apple trees with shining fruit, sweet figs and flourishing olives. Their fruit never perishes nor fails, winter or summer, all the year round; but the west wind, always blowing, makes some grow and ripens others. Pear upon pear grows old, apple on apple, cluster on cluster, and fig on fig. There too his fruitful vineyard is planted; part of it, a warm spot on level ground, is dried by the sun; other grapes they are gathering, others they are treading; in front are unripe grapes shedding their bloom, and others turning dark." Do not these words show a plain and clear imitation of what was said by the first prophet Moses about paradise? And if anyone will look also at the building of the tower, by which the men of that time thought they could make for themselves an ascent to heaven, he will find that this too is sufficiently imitated in allegory by the poet through Otus and Ephialtes. For the poet said thus about them: "They threatened even the immortals on Olympus to raise the din of furious war; they strove to set Ossa on Olympus, and on Ossa leafy Pelion, so that heaven might be climbed." And likewise about the enemy of mankind cast down from the heavens, whom the divine Scriptures call the devil, having obtained this name from his first slander against man; if anyone will examine it carefully, he would find that the poet nowhere mentions the name of the devil, but has made his naming from his most wicked deed. For calling him Ate, the poet says that he was cast down from heaven by their god, as if remembering exactly the words spoken about him by Isaiah the prophet. Thus he wrote in his own poetry: "At once he seized Ate by her head of glossy locks, angry in his heart, and swore a mighty oath that never again would Ate, who blinds all, come to Olympus and the starry heaven. So saying, he hurled her from the starry heaven, whirling her in his hand; and quickly she came to the works of men."

And Plato too, in saying that form is a third principle after God and matter, evidently took the occasion from nowhere else but from Moses, having learned the name of form from the words of Moses, but not having been taught at that time by those who knew that nothing of what was spoken by Moses can be known clearly without mystical contemplation. For Moses wrote that God said to him about the tabernacle thus: "And you shall make for me, according to all that I show you on the mountain, the pattern of the tabernacle." And again: "And you shall set up the tabernacle according to the pattern of all its furnishings, and so you shall make it." And again a little later: "So, then, you shall make it according to the type shown to you on the mountain." Plato, then, having read these, and not receiving the written words with the fitting contemplation, thought that some separate form pre-exists the sensible thing, which he also often calls the pattern of the things that come to be, since the writing of Moses about the tabernacle signifies thus: "According to the form shown to you on the mountain, so you shall make it."

Likewise he evidently erred about the earth, the heaven, and man; for he thinks that there are ideas of these too. For since Moses wrote thus: "In the beginning God made the heaven and the earth," and then joins to it, saying: "And the earth was invisible and unformed," he thought that the earth of which he said "And the earth was" was spoken of as the pre-existing earth, because Moses said, "And the earth was invisible and unformed"; but the one of which he says "God made the heaven and the earth," he thought he was calling the sensible earth that came to be by God according to the pre-existing form. Likewise also about the heaven that came to be: the heaven that was made, which he also named firmament, is the sensible one that came to be, and another is the intelligible one, about which the prophet said: "The heaven of heaven is the Lord's, but the earth he gave to the sons of men." And likewise about man: Moses first mentions the name of man, then, after many of the creatures, makes mention of the forming of man, saying thus: "And God made man, taking dust from the earth." He thought, then, that the man named first pre-existed the one who came to be, while the one formed from the earth came to be later according to the pre-existing form. And that man was formed from earth Homer too knew, having learned it from the old and divine history, which says, "Earth you are, and to earth you will depart"; he calls the lifeless body of Hector "senseless earth." For he says somewhere against Achilles, who was dragging Hector's body after his death: "For in his fury he outrages the senseless earth." And again elsewhere (he represents) Menelaus saying to those who did not readily accept Hector's challenge to single combat: "But may you all become water and earth," in his excessive anger resolving them back into their ancient and first formation from earth. These things Homer and Plato, having learned them from the ancient histories in Egypt, wrote in their own works.

For from where else did Plato learn to say that Zeus drives a winged chariot in heaven, unless he had read the histories of the prophets? For he knew it from the words of the prophet spoken about the cherubim thus: "And the glory of the Lord went out from the house and mounted the cherubim; and the cherubim lifted their wings, and the wheels beside them; and the glory of the Lord God of Israel was over them above." Taking his start from here, the loud-voiced Plato cries out with great boldness: "The great leader in heaven, Zeus, driving a winged chariot." For from where else did he learn these things and write them, if not from Moses and the prophets? And from where did he take the occasion to say that God is in the fiery substance? Was it not from the history of the third (book) of Kingdoms, where it is written: "The Lord was not in the wind; and after the wind an earthquake; the Lord was not in the earthquake; and after the earthquake a fire; the Lord was not in the fire; and after the fire a sound of a gentle breeze" …

And if anyone wishes to examine carefully also the gift that comes down from God above upon the holy men, which the sacred prophets call the Holy Spirit, he would find this too proclaimed by Plato under another name in his discourse to Meno. For fearing to call the gift of God the Holy Spirit, lest he seem, by following the teaching of the prophets, to be an enemy of the Greeks, he confesses that it comes down from God above, but thought fit to call it not the Holy Spirit but virtue. For so, to Meno, in the discourse On Recollection, having first inquired at length about virtue, whether virtue can be taught, or cannot be taught but is acquired by practice, or is neither acquired by practice nor learned but comes to men by nature or in some other way, he declares in these very words: "But if we have now inquired and spoken rightly in this whole discussion, virtue would be neither by nature nor taught, but would come by divine allotment, without understanding, to those to whom it comes." This, I think, Plato evidently learned clearly from the prophets about the Holy Spirit and transferred to the name of virtue. For just as the sacred prophets say that the one and same Spirit is divided into seven spirits, so he too, naming one and the same virtue, says that it is divided into four virtues; wishing nowhere to mention the Holy Spirit, but through a kind of allegory clearly announcing what the prophets said about the Holy Spirit. For thus at the end of his discourse to Meno he said: "From this reasoning, then, Meno, virtue appears to come to us by divine allotment, to those to whom it comes. But we shall know the clear truth about this, in what way virtue comes to men, when we first try to inquire what virtue itself is by itself." See how he calls the gift that comes down from above only "virtue"; and he still thinks it a matter for inquiry whether it ought to be called virtue or something else, fearing to call it openly the Holy Spirit, lest he seem to follow the teaching of the prophets.

And from what source did Plato learn and know that time came into being with heaven? For he wrote thus: "Time, then, came into being with heaven, so that, having come into being together, they may also be dissolved together, if ever their dissolution should take place." Did he not learn this from the divine history of Moses? For he knew that the coming-to-be of time took the beginning of its constitution from days and months and years. Since, then, the first day, which came into being with heaven, furnished the beginning of all time (for so Moses wrote: "In the beginning God made the heaven and the earth," and then joins to it, saying, "And there was one day"), Plato, indicating all time by the part, calls the day time, lest, by mentioning a day, he should be accused among the Athenians of following the words of Moses entirely. And from where … did he imagine the dissolution of heaven and write thus? Did he not learn this too from the sacred prophets, and think that it had been said thus by them?

And if anyone should examine also the account of the statues, from what starting point those who first made your gods decided that they had human forms, he will find that they learned this too from the divine history. For since the history of Moses says, in the person of God, "Let us make man according to our image and likeness," (they thought) it was said thus because men resemble God in form, and so they began to fashion their gods, thinking to make like from like. For what reason have I been led to mention these things now, men of Greece? So that you may know that it is not possible to learn the true religion from these men, who could not write anything of their own even in the things for which they were admired by those outside, but announced in their own writings, through some allegory or other, what was said by Moses and the other prophets.

The time has come, then, men of Greece, for you, persuaded by the outside histories that Moses and the other prophets were by far older than all who were thought to be wise among you, to depart from the old error of your ancestors, to read the divine histories of the prophets, and to learn from them the true religion; for they do not offer you arts of speech, nor speak persuasively and plausibly (this is characteristic of those who wish to steal away the truth), but, using simply whatever names and words come to hand, they announce to you what the Holy Spirit, who came down upon them, chose to teach through them to those who wish to learn the true religion. Thrusting aside, then, all false shame, the old error of men, and the imaginary noise of pomp, by which you think you possess all enjoyment, hold fast to what is profitable for you. For you will commit no offence against your ancestors if you now wish to turn to the opposite of their error; they are now likely lamenting in Hades, repenting a repentance too late; and if it were possible for them to show you from there what has happened to them after the end of this life, you would know from how many evils they would choose to free you. But now, since it is not possible at present to learn either from them, or from those here who profess to philosophize this falsely named philosophy, it remains for you, thrusting away the error of your ancestors, to read the prophecies of the sacred men, not asking elegance of speech from them (for the matters of our religion are not in words but in deeds), and to learn from them what will bring you eternal life. For those who vainly abuse the name of philosophy are convicted of knowing nothing, as …

But if the finding of the truth is called among them a definition of philosophy, how are those who do not attain true knowledge worthy of the name of philosophy? For if Socrates, the wisest of your wise men, to whom even your oracle, as you yourselves say, bears witness, saying, "Of all men Socrates is the wisest," confesses that he knows nothing, how did those after him profess to know even the things in the heavens? For Socrates said that he was called wise for this reason: that while the rest of men pretend to know what they do not know, he himself did not hesitate to confess that he knew nothing. For he said thus: "I seem, then, to be wiser by this very small thing, that what I do not know I do not even think I know." And let no one think that Socrates pretended ignorance in irony, since he is often accustomed to do this in his dialogues. For the last saying of the Apology, which he spoke as he went away to the prison, shows that he confessed his ignorance in earnest and in truth. For he said thus: "But now it is time to go away, I to die and you to live; which of us is going to the better thing is unclear to everyone except to God." Socrates, then, having uttered this last word on the Areopagus, set off for the prison, ascribing to God alone the knowledge of things that are unclear to us; but those after him, unable to know even the things on earth, profess to know the things in heaven as if they had seen them. Aristotle at any rate, as if he had seen the things in the heavens more exactly than Plato, does not say, as Plato did, that God is in the fiery substance, but declared that he is in the ethereal fifth element; and though he thought himself worthy to be believed on these matters because of the elegance of his speech, he could not even know the nature of the Euripus at Chalcis, and departed this life grieved by great disrepute and shame. Let none of those who think rightly, then, consider the eloquence of these men more valuable than his own salvation; but, according to that old story, stopping his ears with wax, let him flee the sweet harm that troubles him from these sirens. For the men mentioned before, holding out their eloquence like bait, have chosen to lead many away from right religion, imitating the one who dared to teach polytheism to the first men. Do not obey them, I beg you, but read the prophecies of the sacred men. And if some hesitation, or the old superstition of your ancestors, still keeps you from reading the prophecies of the holy men, through which you can learn that God is one and only, which is the first mark of true religion, then at least obey Orpheus, who earlier taught you polytheism but later chose to sing a profitable and necessary recantation, saying the things I wrote a little before; and obey the others who wrote the same things about one God. For it has been a work of divine providence on your behalf that these men, even against their will, bear witness that what the prophets said about one God is true, so that the doctrine of polytheism, rejected by all, may give you an occasion for true knowledge.

It will be easy for you to learn the right religion in part also from the ancient Sibyl, who by some powerful inspiration teaches you through oracles things that seem to be near the teaching of the prophets. They say that she came from Babylon, being a daughter of Berossus, who wrote the Chaldean history; and that, having crossed, I do not know how, to the regions of Campania, she uttered her oracles there in a city called Cumae, six miles from Baiae, where the hot springs of Campania are. When we were in the city we saw a certain place in which we were shown a very large basilica cut out of a single stone, a very great thing and worthy of all wonder, where those who had received it as an ancestral tradition from their forefathers said she proclaimed her oracles. In the middle of the basilica they showed us three basins cut out of the same stone, in which, when they were filled with water, they said she bathed; and putting on her robe she went into the innermost chamber of the basilica, also cut from the same stone, and sitting in the middle of the chamber on a high platform and throne, so uttered her oracles. This Sibyl many other writers mention as a prophetess, and Plato in the Phaedrus. And Plato, it seems to me, having read her oracles, held the oracle-singers to be divine. For he saw what had been foretold by her long ago being fulfilled in deeds; and therefore, in admiration, he wrote thus in the discourse to Meno, praising the oracle-singers in these words: "We should rightly call divine those whom we now call oracle-singers. No less would we say that these are divine and inspired, being breathed upon and possessed by the god, when they succeed in saying many great things, knowing nothing of what they say"; looking clearly and plainly to the oracles of the Sibyl. For she, unlike the poets, did not have the power, after writing her poems, to correct and polish them, especially for the exactness of the metres; but at the time of inspiration she fulfilled the prophecy, and when the inspiration ceased, the memory of what she had said ceased too. This is the reason why the metre of not all the Sibyl's verses is preserved. For we ourselves, when we were in that city, learned from the guides, who also showed us the places where she uttered her oracles, and a jar made of bronze in which they said her remains were preserved. And among all the things they told us, as having heard it from their forefathers, they said this too: that those who took down the oracles at that time, being without education, often missed the exactness of the metres; and they said that this was the cause of the faulty metre of some verses, since the oracle-singer did not remember what she had said after the possession and inspiration had ceased, and the scribes, through lack of education, had fallen short of exactness in the metres. It is plain, then, that it was for this reason that Plato, looking to the oracles of the Sibyl, said this about the oracle-singers; for he said thus: "when they succeed in saying many great things, knowing nothing of what they say."

However, since, men of Greece, the matters of true religion lie not in poetic metres, nor in the education esteemed among you, give up from now on (the demand for) exactness of metres and words, and attending without contention to what was said by her, know how many goods she will cause you, foretelling clearly and plainly the coming of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who, being the Word of God, inseparable in power, having taken man formed according to the image and likeness of God, reminded us of the religion of our ancient ancestors, which the men born from them abandoned, by the teaching of an envious demon, and turned to the worship of those who are not gods. And if any hesitation troubles you about believing concerning the formation of man, believe those to whom you still think you should give heed, and know that your oracle, when asked by someone to give out a hymn of the almighty God, said thus in the middle of the hymn: "Who first formed mortals, and named him Adam." And this hymn happens to be preserved among many whom we know, for the refutation of those who are unwilling to believe the truth attested by all. If, then, men of Greece, you do not consider the false fancy about gods who are not more valuable than your own salvation, believe, as I said, the most ancient and very old Sibyl, whose books happen to be preserved throughout the world; who through oracles, by some powerful inspiration, teaches us about the so-called gods, that they are not, and foretells clearly and plainly the coming of our Saviour Jesus Christ that was to be, and all that was to be done by him. For the knowledge of these things will be for you a necessary preparatory exercise for the prophecy of the sacred men. And if anyone thinks he has learned the doctrine about God from those named among them the most ancient philosophers, let him hear Ammon and Hermes: Ammon, in the discourses about him, calling God wholly hidden; and Hermes saying clearly and plainly: "To understand God is difficult, but to speak of him is impossible, even for one who can understand." From every side, then, one should know that in no other way is it possible to learn about God or right religion than (from the prophets), who teach us …