De tribus impostoribus · Die drei Betrüger

Deum esse, eum colendum esse, multi disputant, antequam et quid sit deus, et quid sit esse, quatenus hoc corporibus et Spiritibus, ut eorum fert distinctio, commune est, et quid sit colere deum, intelligant. Interim cultum dei ad mensuram cultus fastuosorum hominum æstimant. Quid sit deus describunt secundum confessionem suæ ignorantiæ: nam, quomodo differat ab aliis rebus, per negationem iustorum conceptuum efferant, necesse est. Esse infinitum ens, id est, cuius fines ignorant, comprehendere nequeunt; Esse creatorem coeli et terrarum aiunt, at quis sit eius creator, non dicunt, quia nesciunt, quia non comprehendunt.

§ 2. Alii ipsum sui principium dicunt, et a nullo, nisi a se, esse contendunt; itidem ii dicentes quid, quod non intelligunt. Non, aiunt, capimus eius principium, ergo non datur. (Cur non ita: non capimus ipsum deum; ergo non datur) Atque hæc est ignorantiæ prima regula.

§ 3. Non datur processus in infinitum. Cur non? Quia intellectus humanus in aliquo subsistere debet. Cur debet? Quia solet, quia non potest sibi aliquid ultra suos fines imaginari, quasi vero sequatur, ego non capio infinitum; ergo non datur.

§ 4. Et tamen, uti experientia notum, inter messiæ sectarios aliqui processus infinitos divinarum sive proprietatum, sive personarum, de quarum finitionibus lis tamen adhuc est, et sic dari omnino processus in infinitum statuunt. Ab infinito enim generatur filius, ab infinito spiratur spiritus sanctus. In infinitum generatur, proceditur. Si enim coepissent, aut si desinerent semel generatio ista, spiratio, æternitatis conceptus violaretur.

§ 5. Quod si etiam in hoc cum istis convenias, quod hominum procreatio non possit in infinitum extendi, quod tamen propter finitum suum intellectum ita concludunt, nondum iam constabit; anne et suo modo aliæ inter superos generationes, æque tanto numero fuerint, ac hominum in terra, at quis ex tanto numero pro deo præcipuo recipiendus? Nam et mediatores deos dari, omnis religio concedit, quamvis non omnes sub æqualibus terminis. Unde illud principium: ens supra hominem, per naturam suam elevatum, debere esse unum, labefactari videtur. Atque inde ex diversitate deorum progeneratorum diversitates religionum et varietatem cultuum postmodum ortas dici poterit: quibus potissimum ethnicorum nititur devotio.

§ 6. Quod autem obiicitur de coedibus aut concubitu deorum paganorum, præterquam quod hæc mystice intelligenda, sapientissimi ethnicorum iam dudum ostenderunt, similia in aliis reperiri; strages tot gentium per Mosen et Josuam dei iussu perpetratæ; sacrificium humanum etiam deus Isrælis Abrahamo iniunxerat. Effectus non secutus in casu extraordinario; nil autem iubere poterat, aut serio iuberi ab Abrahamo credi poterat, quod prorsus et per se dei naturæ adversum fuisset. Mahomet in præmium suæ superstitionis totum orbem pollicetur, et christiani passim de strage suorum inimicorum, et subiugatione hostium ecclesiæ vaticinantur, quæ sane non exigua fuit, ex quo christiani ad rerum publicarum gubernacula sederunt.

§ 7. Nonne polygamia per Mahometem, Mosen, et ut pars disputat, in Novo Testamento etiam concessa? Nonne deus spiritus sanctus peculiari coniunctione ex virgine desponsata, filium dei progeneravit?

§ 8. Quæ reliqua de ridiculis idolis, de abusu cultus, ethnicis obiiciuntur, tanti non sunt, ut nec paria reliquis sectariis obiici queant; quos tamen abusus a ministris potius, quam principibus religionum provenisse, facili labore monstrari potest.

§ 9. Cæterum, ut ad priora redeam, hoc ens, quod intellectus processum terminat, alii naturam vocant, alii deum. Aliqui in his conveniunt, alii differunt. Quidam mundos ab æterno somniant, et rerum connexionem deum vocant; quidam ens separatum, quod nec videri nec intelligi potest, quamvis et apud hos contradictiones non infrequentes sint, deum volunt. Religionem, quatenus concernit cultum, alii in metu invisibilium potentium, alii in amore ponunt. Quod si potentes invisibiles falsi sint, idololatria efficitur, una pars mutuo ab altera, prout sua cuiusque principia.

§ 10. Amorem ex benevolentia nasci volunt, et ad gratitudinem referunt, cum tamen ex sympathia humorum potissimum oriatur, et inimicorum benefacta odium gravius maxime stimulent, licet id hypocritarum nemo confiteri ausit. At quisnam amorem ex benevolentia eius emanare statuat, qui homini leonis, ursi et aliarum ferociorum bestiarum particulas indidit, ut naturam contrariam inclinationi creatoris indueret? Qui, non ignorans debilitatem humanæ naturæ, arborem ipsis posuerit, unde certe norat reatum ipsos hausturos sibi, et omnibus suis successoribus (uti quidam volunt) exitialem: et hi tamen, quasi pro insigni beneficio, ad cultum vel gratiarum actionem teneantur. Scilicet. Hoc Ithavis velis, etc.

§ 11. Arripe mortalia arma, e. g. ensem, si certissima præscientia tibi constet (quam tamen et alii, quoad contingentia, in deo non dari, adstruunt), hoc ipso eum, cui ob oculos ponis, arrepturum, seque et suam progeniem omnem miseranda morte interempturum: cui adhuc aliqua humanitatis gutta supererit, horrebit talia perpetrare. Accipe inquam gladium, qui e. g. pater es, qui amicus es, et si pater es, si amicus genuinus, obiice amico vel liberis, cum iussu, ne incurrant, citra omnem dubitationem tamen et incursurum et miserandam stragem suorum eorumque adhuc innocentium, daturum prævidens. Cogita, qui pater es, an eiusmodi quid facturus esses? Quid est ludibrium prohibitioni afferre, si hoc non est? Et tamen deus hæc præcepisse debuit.

§ 12. Hunc ex benefacto suo colendum esse volunt, quia aiunt, si deus est, colendus est. Simili modo uti inde colligunt: Magnus Mogol est, ergo colendus. Colunt etiam eum sui, sed cur? Ut nempe impotenti eius et omnium magnatum fastui satisfiat, nil ultra. Colitur enim potissimum ob metum potentiæ visibilis, spemque dein remunerationis. Eadem ratio in cultu parentum et aliorum capitum obtinet. Et quoniam potentiæ invisibiles graviores et maiores habentur visibilibus, ergo etiam magis colendas esse volunt. Atque hi, deus ob amorem colendus, inquiunt. At quis amor, innocentes posteros ob unius certo provisum et proin et præordinatum factum (præordinationem concedendo ad minimum) obiicere reatui infinito? Sed redimendos inquis. At quomodo? Pater unum filium miseriæ addicet extremæ, ut alterum cruciatibus haud minoribus tradat propter prioris redemtionem. Nec tale novere barbari.

§ 13. At cur amandus, cur colendus est? Quia creavit. Esto, ad id, ut laberemur? Quia certo præscivit lapsuros, et medium proposuit pomi vetiti, sine quo labi non poterant. Et tamen, colendum esse, quia ab eo omnia dependent in fieri, addunt tamen alii in esse quoque et conservari.

§ 14. Quem in finem colendus? An ipse cultus indigus aut cultu placatur? Ita quidem est: parentes et benefactores coluntur apud nos, quid hic cultus est? Societas humana mutuæ indigentiæ prospicit, et cultus est ob opinionem potentiæ nobis subveniendi maioris et proprioris. Subvenire nemo vult alteri sine mutuo adiumento suæ quoque indigentiæ, quod, quia hæc pars tantum non indiget, agnitio beneficii et gratia vocatur, quam maiorem recognitionem sui beneficii postulat, atque exin celebretur, alter ei ad manus velut pedissequasit, ut claritatem etiam, et suspicionem magnificentiæ apud alios suscitet. Scilicet opinio aliorum de nostra potentia subveniendi particulari vel communi indigentiæ, nos titillat et cristas pavonis instar erigit, unde et magnificentia inter virtutes est. At quis non videt imperfectionem nostræ naturæ?

§ 15. Deum autem omnium perfectissimum indigere aliqua re, quis dixerit? velle autem eiusmodi, si perfectus sit, et iam in se satis contentus et honoratus, citra omnes extra eum honores, quis dixerit, nisi qui indigere eum? Desiderium honoris, imperfectionis et impotentiæ signum præbet.

§ 16. Consensum omnium gentium hoc in passu urgent aliqui, qui vel solos populares suos vix omnes allocuti, vel tres aut quatuor libros de testimonio universi agentes inspexerint; quatenus vero auctori de moribus universi constet, non perpendentes, at nec boni illi auctores omnes norunt.

§ 17. Nota tamen de cultu, fundamentum in ipso deo et operibus eius non in solo alicuius societatis aliquo interesse habente, hic quæstionem esse. Nam ex usu id esse potissimum imperantium et divitum in republica, ut exteriorem aliquam religionis rationem habeant, ad emolliendam ferocitatem populi, nemo est, qui non intelligat. Cæterum de priori ratione sollicitus, quis in principali religionis christianæ sede, Italia, tot Libertinos, et ut quid gravius dicam, tot Atheos latere credat, et si crediderit, qui dicat, consensum omnium gentium esse: deum esse, eum colendum esse? Scilicet, quia saniores tamen id dicunt? Quinam saniores? Summus pontifex, augures et auspices veterum, Cicero, Cæsar principes et his adhærentes sacerdotes etc. Unde vero constat, quod sic dicant et statuant, uti dicunt, et non ob interesse suum talia præ se ferant? Hi nempe ad gubernacula rerum sedent, et reditus ex populi credulitate summam invisibilium potentiam et vindictam minantem, suamque quandoque cum his intimiorem collationem et nexum ementiti, pro sua luxuria idoneos vel excedentes sibi acquirunt. Sacerdotes enim talia docere, mirum non est, quia hæc ratio vitæ ipsorum sustinendæ est. Et hæc sunt ea saniorum dictamina. Dependeat hoc universum a directione primi moventis, at vero id dependentia prima erit. Quid enim impedit, quo minus talis primus dei ordo fuerit, ut omnia cursu semel præstituto, irent usque ad terminum præfixum, si quem præfigere voluit? Nec nova cura, dependentia vel sustentatione iam opus erit, sed ipsis ab initio cuique virium satis largiri potuit. Et cur non fecisse autumandus? Nec enim visitare eum omnia elementa et universi partes, sicut medicus ægrotum, credendum est.

§ 18. Quid ergo de conscientiæ testimonio dicendum, et unde illi animi metus ex malefactis, si non constaret nobis speculatorem et vindicem desuper adstare, cui haec vel illa displiceant, utpote cultui eius omnino contraria? Non iam animus est naturam boni vel mali, nec pericula præiudiciorum et plurimi timoris vanitates, ex præconceptis opinionibus oriundas, altius persequi. Id tantum dico, inde hæc ortum ducere, quia nempe omnia malefacta nituntur in corruptione et inversione harmoniæ subveniendi mutuæ indigentiæ, quæ genus humanum sustentat, et quia opinio de eo, qui promovere magis quam adiuvare indigentiam istam velit, odiosum eum reddit. Unde contingit, ut ipse timeat, ne vel aversionem aliorum et contemtum incurrat, vel æqualem denegationem subveniendi indigentiæ suæ; vel amittat potentiam suam insuper tum aliis tum sibi succurrendi, quatenus nempe spoliationem potentiæ nocendi a reliquis metuere debet.

§ 19. Atque ita agere, aiunt, eos, qui non habent lumen scripturæ, secundum naturale lumen pro conscientiæ suæ dictamine, quod certo arguat, indidisse deum intellectui communi hominum, scintillas suæ cognitionis et voluntatis aliquas, secundum quas agentes, recte fecisse dicendi sint. Et quænam ratio horum colendi deum dictaminum esse queat, si non hæc sit!

§ 20. Cæterum anne bestiæ secundum ductum rationis agant, multis rationibus disputatur, nec iam decisum est, quod tamen non moveo. Quis tibi dixit, quod id non fiat, aut quod politum brutum rudi homini et sylvestri quandoque intellectu et facultate diiudicandi non præstet? Ut autem, quod res est, dicam, plurima otiosorum hominum pars, qui ex cogitationibus rerum subtiliorum et communem captum excedentium vacarunt, ut suo fastui, satisfacerent atque utilitati, multas subtiles regulas excogitarunt, quibus nec Thyrsis nec Alexis, cura sua pastorali et rustica impediti, vacare poterant. Unde hi fidem otiosis speculantibus habuere quasi sapientoribus, adde et aptioribus ad imponendum insipidis. Hinc bone Alexi! abi penes Sylvanos, Satyrosque, Dianas, etc. cole, isti enim magni philosophi tibi communicationem somnii Pompilliani facient, et concubitus cum Nymphe Egeria narrare, et hoc ipso ad istorum cultum adstringere valent, proque mercede sui operis et reconciliatione et favore illarum invisibilium potentiarum sacrificia succumque gregem et sudorem tuum pro sua sustentatione desiderabunt. Et hinc, quia Titius Panem, Alexis Faunos, Roma Martes, Athenæ ignotos deus coluere, credendum est, bonos istos homines quædam ex lumine naturæ cognovisse, quæ otiosa speculantium inventa et attributa erant, ne quid inclementius in aliorum religiones dicam. Et cur hæc ratio non etiam dictavit aberrare eos in cultu, signaque et lapides tanquam deorum suorum habitacula ridicule colere? An vero credendum est, quia bonæ foeminiculæ Franciscum, Ignatium, Dominicum, et similes tanto cultu prosequuntur, dictare rationem ad minimum Sanctorum hominum aliquem esse colendum, et istas ex lumine naturæ prospicere cultum alicuius potentiæ superioris iam non visibilis. Cum tamen hæc sint commenta otiosorum nostrorum sacerdotum pro suæ sustentationis lautiori incremento.

§ 21. Ergone deus non est? Esto, sit; ergo colendus? Sed hoc non sequitur, quia cultum non desiderat, sed desiderat qui id inscripsit cordi. Esto insuper et hoc inscriptum cordi, quid tum amplius? Sequemur ergo naturæ nostræ ductum. At is agnoscitur imperfectus esse: In quibus? Sufficit enim ad societatem hominum sic satis tranquille colendam. Nec enim alii religiosi revelationem secuti felicius vitam transigunt. At magis est, quod de nobis exigit deus, imprimis cognitionem dei exactiorem. Sed tu, qui id spondes, cuiuscunque religionis sis, non præstas. Quid enim deus sit, in revelatione qualicunque obscurius longe est, quam antea. Et quomodo conceptibus intellectus id clarius sistes, quod omnem intellectum terminat? Quid tibi videtur de his? Deum nemo novit unquam, item: Oculus non vidit, item: habitat in luce inaccessibili, item: post revelationem adhuc in ænigmate? At quanta ænigmatis claritas sit, cuique notum credo. Verum unde tibi id constat, deum ista exigere? An ex desiderio intellectus terminos sui captus superandi et omnia perfectius quam facit concipiendi, an aliunde? Ex speciali revelatione? Quis es, qui hoc dicis? Bone deus! quanta revelationum farrago! Oracula ethnicorum prodis? Hæc iam risit antiquitas. Sacerdotum tuorum testimonia? Sacerdotes tibi offero contradictorios. Pugnetis invicem: Sed quis iudex erit, quis controversiæ finis? Mosis, prophetarum, apostolorum scripta profers? Opponit se tibi Alcoranus, qui hæc corrupta dicit ex novissima revelatione; et autor eius divinis miraculis se gloriatur, corruptelas et altercationes christianorum gladio secuisse; ut Moses Ethnicorum. Vi enim Mahomet, vi et Moses Palæstinam subiugavit, uterque magnis miraculis instructus. At sectarii istorum, ut et veda et brachmannorum ante MCCCC retro secula obstant collectanea, ut de sinensibus nihil dicam. Tu qui in angulo Europæ hic delitescis, ista negligis, negas; quam bene, videas ipse. Eadem facilitate enim isti tua negant. Et quid non miraculorum superesset, ad convincendos orbis incolas, si mundum ex scorpionis ovo progenitum terramque tauri capiti impositam, et rerum prima fundamenta ex prioribus tribus vedæ libris constarent, nisi invidus aliquis deorum filius hæc tria volumina furatus esset. Nostri id rident; at apud eos novum hoc stabiliendæ religionis argumentum foret, non tamen, nisi in cerebro sacerdotum suorum fundamentum habens. Et unde alias profecta tot immensa de diis ethnicorum volumina et mendaciorum plaustra.

§ 22. Sapientius Moses, qui artibus primo Ægyptiorum occultis, id est astrorum et magiæ cultu, dein armorum ferocia Palestinæ regulos sedibus expulit, et specie colloquii Pompiliani fidentem rebus suis exercitum in otiosorum hominum possessiones advexit: scilicet, ut ipse esset dux magnus et frater eius sacerdos maximus, ut ipse princeps et dictator aliquando populi esset. Alii per vias dulciores et delinimenta populi sub proferenda sanctitate (horresco reliqua proferre) et eorum sectarii per pias fraudes, in occultioribus conventiculis, primo imperitam paganorum plebem, dein et ob vim pullulantis novæ religionis, timentes de se et odiosos populi principes occuparunt. Tandem alius belli studiosus ferociores Asiæ populos a Christianorum imperatoribus male habitos, fictis miraculis ad se adscivit, sub promissione tot beneficiorum et victoriarum, exemplo Mosis, discordes et otiosos Asiæ principes subiugavit, et per acinacem religionem suam stabilivit. Prior ethnicismi, alter iudaismi, tertius utriusque corrector habitus, quis mahometis, quis mahometismi futurus sit, videndum est.

§ 23. Scilicet eo credulitas hominum fraudibus subiecta est, cuius abusus sub specie alicuius utilitatis merito impostura vocatur. Cuius in genere naturam et species hic latius evolvere nimis et longum foret et tædiosum.

§ 24. Cæterum id nobis observandum, quod concessa etiam naturali religione et debito cultu divino, quatenus per naturam dictari dicitur, iam omnis novæ religionis princeps imposturæ suspectus sit; potissimum, cum, quantæ in religione aliqua propaganda fraudes intervenerint, in aprico omnibus sit, et ex dictis et dicendis obvium.

§ 25. Manet ergo id secundum suppositum prius immobile: Religionem et cultum dei secundum dictamen luminis naturalis consentaneam et veritati et æquitati esse. Qui vero aliud quid circa religionem statuere vult, vel novum, vel dissonum idque auctoritate superioris invisibilis suam reformandi potestatem evidenter producat, necesse est, nisi ab omnibus impostor haberi velit, qui omnium sententiæ aversatur, non sub concluso ex naturali ratione, non sub revelationis specialis auctoritate. Insuper sit eiusmodi vitæ ac morum, qui a multitudine dignus credi possit, quem tam summum et sanctum numen in suam conversationem recipiat, cui nil placuit impuri quidquam; nec id solum propria confessio, aut vita sic satis sancta aut miracula aliqua, id est actiones extraordinariæ probare poterunt: nam et id magis artificiosis et deceptoribus hominum, mendacibus, hypocritis, commune est, qui ex istis rebus commodum aut gloriam aucupantur; nec etiam id attendendum, eo vesaniæ quosdam processisse, ut sponte mortem appeterent, quo contemnere omnia et sincere crederentur, uti varii apud philosophos veteres. Nec enim credendum peculiaribus eos divinis viribus suffultos fuisse, in eo, quod ex inani imaginatione et vana aureorum montium persuasione propter defectum iudicii perpetrarunt. Hi enim nec rem satis iudicarunt, nec rei doctores, quos ut probe discernas, dixi non solum proprium eorum testimonium non sufficere, sed et ipsos inter se et alios testes cum ipsis conferre opus est, eosque tum notos et familiares, tum ignotos, tum amicos et inimicos, atque dein collectis omnium testimoniis, tum cuiusque doctoris de se ipso, tum aliorum veritatem rei penetrare. Et si testes ipsi nobis ignoti sint, testes de testibus, et sic porro consulendi erunt. Adiecto insuper examine de sua iudicandi facultate; an capax sis, falsum talibus vel aliis circumstantiis, maxime vero similibus involutum, a vero discernendi, addita inquisitione unde eas notas hauseris veritatis dignoscendæ; collato adhuc aliorum iudicio, quid hi ex tali demonstratione vel testimonio colligant. Atque hinc concludere licebit, an verus revelatæ voluntatis divinæ nuntius sit, quid id præ se fert, et an dictamen eius presso pede sequendum sit. At ne hic in circulum incidamus, omnino cavendum est. Cumque primaria religionum ea sit natura, ut una aliam præsupponat, ut Mosis paganismum, Messiæ iudaismum, Mahumedis christianismum, nec semper aut quoad omnia, sed artis solum in partibus posterior priorem reiiciat, quoad reliqua etiam in prioribus se fundet, ut Messias faciunt et Mahumed; opus erit non solum postremam, nec mediam vel priorem, sed omnes et singulas accurate perlustrare, præcipue cum in quavis secta imposturæ arguantur ut veteres a Messia, qui legem corruperint, Christiani a Mahumeto, qui corruperint evangelium. Quoad hos nil mirum, cum et christianorum secta altera alteram corrupti textus novi testamenti arguat; ut constare queat, an et hic, qui imitandus proponitur, veræ religionis doctor sit, et quatenus ii, qui se præpositos dicunt, audiendi sint. Nulla enim in examine secta prætermittenda, sed omnis conferenda, citra qualecunque præiudicium. Nam, si unica prætermittatur, ea forsan ipsa est, quæ verior est. Ita qui Mosen sequitur, veritatem secutus erit etiam secundum christianos; ceterum in eo solo non debebat subsistere, sed et veritatem christianæ religionis indagare.

§ 26. Omnes equidem doctores secum esse unaquæque secta asserit, et quælibet se id expertam, et quotidie adhuc experiri, nec dari alios meliores. Adeo ut vel omnibus credendum, quod ridiculum, vel nulli, quod est securius, usque dum vera sit via cognita, ne tamen ulla in collatione prætereatur. Non obstat, quod ut cognoscatur, bis duo esse quatuor, omnes mathematicos congregare: Res enim non est eadem, quia nemo est visus, qui dubitaverit an bis duo quatuor sint, cum e contrario religiones nec in fine nec in principiis nec in mediis concordent. Ponamus sis, ignorare me rectam salutis viam, sequar interim Brachmannos vel Alcoranum; nonne Moses et reliqui dicent; et quid mali tibi a nobis profectum est, quod ita reiiciamur, meliores interim et veriores! Quid respondebimus! Credidi mahumeto vel gymnosophistis, in quorum doctrina natus educatus sum, et unde intellexi, tuam et sequentem christianorum religionem iam dudum abolitam et corruptam esse, vel corruptrices esse. Nonne reponent, nescire se quicquam de illis et illos deesse vero salutis ductu, quodque sciant, esse, quod corruptores sunt et impostores, fictis miraculis et mendaciis populum delinientes. Nec ita simpliciter fidem adhibendam uni hominum vel sectæ, reiectis citra omne vel debitum examen reliquis omnibus. Eodem enim iure dicere Æthiopem, qui non sortitus sit de suis terris, non dari alterius quam nigri coloris sub sole homines. Præterea et id in examine sectarum reliquarum attendi debet, ut par in omnium inquisitione diligentia adhibeatur, nec altera ingenti opera illustrata, reliquæ vix levi brachio tangantur, statim ob unam vel alteram positionem primo intuitu iniquam visam, aut ob famæ malos de Principe eius sectæ rumores, a tergo reiectis reliquis. Nec enim confestim pro dogmate vel indubitato testimonio habendum, quod vagabundorum primus quisque de adversa religione adseruerit. Eodem nempe iure primitus communi fama, et sola nominis recensitione, christiana religio horrori aliis erat, aliis ludibrio; apud hos, quod asini caput colerent, apud illos, quod deos suos comederent ac biberent etc. ut christianum esse, id demum capitalem dei et hominum inimicum esse reputaretur; cum tamen eiusmodi narrata vel male intellecta vel egregia mendacia essent, quæ inde confirmabantur, partimque orta erant, quod hostes illius religionis vel plane non, vel non recte, cum ipsis christianis et ex his scientioribus conferrent, verum primo idiotæ vel desertori aut inimico eius crediderint. Cumque ita proposita examinis ratio tantæ difficultatis sit res, quid de infantibus dicemus, quid de foeminis, quid de maxima plebis parte? exclusi iam erunt a securitate de sua religione omnes infantes, et foeminarum maxima pars cui et ea quoque quæ clarissime, quam fieri potest, ex principiis alicuius religionis deducuntur, tenebræ sunt. Et ex earum modo vivendi probe conspicis, non habere ipsas, nisi perpaucissimas eximas, tam exactam facultatem penetrandi eiusmodi mysteria. Ut nihil de infinitate minuti populi aut rusticorum dicam, quibus alimentorum suorum quæsitio pro summa rationis est, reliqua bona fide vel adsumunt, vel reiiciunt. Ita scilicet minimæ orbis parti tantum superest, ut omnes religiones ponderet, suam exacte conferat, rationes veritatis vel fraudis, in quibus nempe minutiis decipi possit, probe discernat, sed potior numerus aliorum fidem, ut plurimum rerum sacrarum. Professorum, quorum scientia et iudicandi in sacris facultas notoria habetur, sequitur; idque in quavis religione, quod ii, qui legere et scribere nequeunt, aut quod legant, non habent. Notandum autem erat, quod hic non sufficiat, religionis alicuius doctores iudicio et experientia professa satis accuratis pollere, ut verum a falso discernere queant; sed et reliquis certo certius et iudicio non minus accurato id constare debet, insuper, habere illos verum a falso discernendi non modo facultatem sed et manifestandi voluntatem. Certi quippe adprime esse debemus, nec falli, nec fallere velle eum, qui eiusmodi scientiam et voluntatem profitetur.

§ 27. Et qualem hic inter tot diversissimos etiam unius sectæ palmariæ doctores electionem faciemus? Quando enim socios et collegas intuemur, qui in pluribus sententiis disconveniunt, ceteroquin amicissimi, alteruter dissentiens id facit propter aliquem defectum, vel quod rem non intelligat recte, atque ita facultate iudicandi careat, vel quod cedere nolit, et ita voluntatem vera fatendi non habeat. Ac, licet hoc tantum in articulis secundariis contingeret, tamen suspecti hi redduntur etiam quoad reliqua, in utroque quippe veritas una est, et qui una in parte ab ea, vel ex defectu iudicandi, vel ex voluntate depravata recedit, eius rei etiam in reliquis suspectus, atque id merito, redditur. Quare, ut iudicare possis de habilitate vel ingenuitate alicuius doctoris in religione, primo æque habilis sis ac ille, necesse est, alias enim facillime imponere tibi poterit: et ille præterea, si tibi non omnino sit notus, testimonio aliorum indigebit, et hi rursus aliorum, quod ad infinitum trahit, nec solum veritatis scilicet docuisse talia ipsum, sed et ingenuitatis, citra fraudem id fecisse. Et de testibus ingenuitatis et dictorum itidem ratio omnino habenda erit. Quem vero hic terminum pones? Nec id satis est, apud alios talia iam disputata esse; quam bene etiam id factum sit, videndum. Communes namque demonstrationes, quæ publicantur, nec certæ, nec evidentes sunt, et res dubias probant per alias sæpius magis dubias; adeo, ut exemplo eorum, qui circulum currunt, ad terminum semper redeas; a quo currere incæpisti.

Die berühmte Schrift, welche ich bereits im Jahre 1846 der Oeffentlichkeit übergab, ist ein Abdruck eines gedruckten Exemplars der Dresdner königlichen Bibliothek, welches den Titel fuhrt: ‚De tribus impostoribus, Ao. MDIIC.‘ (Titel und 46 Seiten 4.) und seiner Zeit mit 100 Gulden bezahlt wurde. Ebert in seinem bibliographischen Lexicon meint, dass man nur drei Exemplare dieser Originalausgabe kenne: in der Pariser damals königlichen Bibliothek, in der ehemaligen Crevenna’schen und in der von Renouard. Dass sie wirklich 1598 in Deutschland (oder in Rackau) gedruckt worden ist, darauf lässt Thomas Campanella schliessen, wenn er in seinem Atheismus triumphatus 1636 zu wiederholten Malen von einer in Deutschland gedruckten Ausgabe spricht und als die Zeit ihres Entstehens das Jahr 1538 angibt; weniger Florimond Raimond (d. i. Louis Richeome), der sie bei seinem 1572 verstorbenen Lehrer Peter Ramus gesehen haben will. All das Gerede theologischer Kritiker, dass das Büchlein zuerst im 17. Jahrhundert gedruckt worden sei, ist aus der Luft gegriffen. Der Originaldruck hat nichts Modernes; man vergleiche z. B. Martin Wittel’sche Drucke aus den neunziger Jahren des 16. Jahrhunderts, von denen man ebenso gut behaupten könnte, dass sie nicht aus jener Zeit stammen, weil Papier und Druck dem im 18. Jahrhundert gebrauchten ähneln.

Über wenige Schriften der Vorzeit, wenn wir die religiösen Mythen ausnehmen, sind so viele Hypothesen aufgestellt worden. Nach den Einen, wie Joh. Brant, sei sie in Krakau, nach den Andern in Italien oder Ungarn gedruckt als Übersetzung eines in Frankreich irgendwo existirenden arabischen Originals. Schon Wilh. Postel erwähnt ihrer als eines Tractatus de tribus prophetis und als Verfasser den spanischen Arzt Michael Servet. Der Kapuziner Joly versichert im dritten Bande seiner ‚Conferenzen über die Mysterien‘, dass der Hugenot Nic. Barnaud 1612 wegen Verfertigung der Abhandlung De tribus impostoribus excommunicirt worden sei. Johann Müller erzählt in seinem ‚Besiegten Atheismus‘ von einem gewissen Nachtigal, der sie 1614 im Haag herausgegeben und deswegen verwiesen wurde. Mosheim und Rousset nennen gar den Kaiser Friedrich II., der sie mit Hülfe seines Kanzlers Petrus de Vineis verfasst haben soll. Vineis erklärt sich aber (Epist. lib. I. c. 31. p. 211) selbst gegen den Grundgedanken des Buches. Nach Andern wieder habe es Averroës, Peter Aretin, Petrus Pomponatius geschrieben. Heinrich Ernst gibt obengenannten Postel an, welcher selbst erst dem Servet, dann den Hugenotten die Herausgabe zu schreibt. Der Urheber, sagt man ferner, sei Julius Caesar Vanini, der 1619 zu Toulouse, oder Ryswick, der 1612 zu Rom verbrannt wurde, Macchiavel, Rabelais, Erasmus, Milton (der doch erst 1608 geboren), ein Mahomedaner Merula, Dolet, Giordano Bruno. Nach Campanella, welcher hin und wieder selbst für den Verfasser gehalten wurde, ist es Muret oder Joh. Franz Poggio, nach Browne Bernhard Ochin, nach Maresius Johann Boccaccio.
— Emil Weller: De tribus impostribus. anno MDIIC. Zweite mit einem neuen Vorwort versehene Auflage. Heilbronn: Gebr. Henninger, 1876. pp. III-V.

Καλῶς ἔχειν ἔμοιγε φαίνεται τὰς αἰτίας ἐϰϑέσϑαι πᾶσιν ἀνϑϱώποις, ὑφ̓ ὧν ἐπείσϑην ὅτι τῶν Γαλιλαίων ἡ σϰευωϱία πλάσμα ἐστὶν ἀνϑϱώπων [39b]ὑπὸ ϰαϰουϱγίας συντεϑέν. ἔχουσα μὲν οὐδὲν ϑεῖον, ἀποχϱησαμένη δὲ τῷ φιλομύϑῳ ϰαὶ παιδαϱιώδει ϰαὶ ἀνοήτῳ τῆς ψυχῆς μοϱίῳ, τὴν τεϱατολογίαν εἰς πίστιν ἤγαγεν ἀληϑείας. [41e]Μέλλων δὲ ὑπὲϱ τῶν πϱώτων λεγομένων δογμάτων ἁπάντων ποιεῖσϑαι τὸν λόγον, ἐϰεῖνο βούλομαι πϱῶτον εἰπεῖν, ὅτι χϱὴ τοὺς ἐντυγχάνοντας, εἴπεϱ ἀντιλέγειν ἐϑέλοιεν, ὥσπεϱ ἐν διϰαστηϱίῳ μηδὲν ἔξωϑεν πολυπϱαγμονεῖν μηδέ, τὸ λεγόμενον, ἀντιϰατηγοϱεῖν, ἕως ἂν ὑπὲϱ τῶν παῤ [42a]αὐτοῖς ἀπολογήσωνται. ἄμεινον μὲν γὰϱ οὕτω, ϰαὶ σαφέστεϱον ἰδίαν μὲν ἐνστήσασϑαι πϱαγματείαν, ὅταν τι τῶν παῤ ἡμῖν εὐϑύνειν ϑέλωσιν, ἐν οἷς δὲ πϱὸς τὰς παῤ ἡμῶν εὐϑύνας ἀπολογοῦνται, μηδὲν ἀντιϰατηγοϱεῖν. [42e]Μιϰϱὸν δὲ ἀναλαβεῖν ἄξιον, ὅϑεν ἡμῖν ἥϰει ϰαὶ ὅπως ἔννοια ϑεοῦ τὸ πϱῶτον, εἶτα παϱαϑεῖναι τὰ παϱὰ τοῖς Ἕλλησι ϰαὶ παϱὰ τοῖς Ἑβϱαίοις ὑπὲϱ [43a]τοῦ ϑείου λεγόμενα, ϰαὶ μετὰ τοῦτο ἐπανεϱέσϑαι τοὺς οὔτε Ἕλληνας οὔτε Ἰουδαίους, ἀλλὰ τῆς Γαλιλαίων ὄντας αἱϱέσεως, ἀνϑ̓ ὅτου πϱὸ τῶν ἡμετέϱων εἵλοντο τὰ παῤ ἐϰείνοις, ϰαὶ ἐπὶ τούτῳ, τί δή ποτε μηδ̓ ἐϰείνοις ἐμμένουσιν, ἀλλὰ ϰἀϰείνων ἀποστάντες ἰδίαν ὁδὸν ἐτϱάποντο. ὁμολογήσαντες μὲν οὐδὲν τῶν ϰαλῶν οὐδὲ τῶν σπουδαίων οὔτε τῶν παῤ ἡμῖν τοῖς Ἕλλησιν οὔτε τῶν παϱὰ τοῖς ἀπὸ Μωυσέως Ἑβϱαίοις, ἀπ̓ ἀμφοῖν δὲ τὰς παϱαπεπηγυίας τούτοις τοῖς ἔϑνεσιν ὥσπεϱ τινὰς [43b]Κῆϱας δϱεπόμενοι, τὴν ἀϑεότητα μὲν ἐϰ τῆς Ἰουδαϊϰῆς ῥᾳδιουϱγίας, φαῦλον δὲ ϰαὶ ἐπισεσυϱμένον βίον ἐϰ τῆς παῤ ἡμῖν ῥᾳϑυμίας ϰαὶ χυδαιότητος, τοῦτο τὴν ἀϱίστην ϑεοσέβειαν ἠϑέλησαν ὀνομάζεσϑαι. [52b]Ὅτι δὲ οὐ διδαϰτόν, ἀλλὰ φύσει τὸ εἰδέναι ϑεὸν τοῖς ἀνϑϱώποις ὑπάϱχει, τεϰμήϱιον ἡμῖν ἔστω πϱῶτον ἡ ϰοινὴ πάντων ἀνϑϱώπων ἰδίᾳ ϰαὶ δημοσίᾳ ϰαὶ ϰατ̓ ἄνδϱα ϰαὶ ἔϑνη πεϱὶ τὸ ϑεῖον πϱοϑυμία. ἅπαντες γὰϱ ἀδιδάϰτως ϑεῖόν τι πεπιστεύϰαμεν, ὑπὲϱ οὗ τὸ μὲν ἀϰϱιβὲς οὔτε πᾶσι ῥᾴδιον γινώσϰειν οὔτε τοῖς ἐγνωϰόσιν εἰπεῖν εἰς πάντας δυνατόν... ταύτῃ δὴ τῇ ϰοινῇ πάντων ἀνϑϱώπων ἐννοίᾳ πϱόσεστι ϰαὶ ἄλλη. πάντες γὰϱ οὐϱανῷ [52c]ϰαὶ τοῖς ἐν αὐτῷ φαινομένοις ϑεοῖς οὕτω δή τι φυσιϰῶς πϱοσηϱτήμεϑα, ὡς ϰαὶ εἴ τις ἄλλον ὑπέλαβε παῤ αὐτοὺς τὸν ϑεόν, οἰϰητήϱιον αὐτῷ πάντως τὸν οὐϱανὸν ἀπένειμεν, οὐϰ ἀποστήσας αὐτὸν τῆς γῆς, ἀλλ̓ οἷον ὡς εἰς τιμιώτεϱον τοῦ παντὸς ἐϰεῖνο τὸν βασιλέα ϰαϑίσας τῶν ὅλων ἐφοϱᾶν ἐϰεῖϑεν ὑπολαμβάνων τὰ τῇδε. [69b]Τί δεῖ μοι ϰαλεῖν Ἕλληνας ϰαὶ Ἑβϱαίους ἐνταῦϑα μάϱτυϱας; οὐδεὶς ἔστιν, ὃς οὐϰ ἀνατείνει μὲν εἰς οὐϱανὸν τὰς χεῖϱας εὐχόμενος, ὀμνύων δὲ ϑεὸν ἤτοι ϑεούς, ἔννοιαν ὅλως τοῦ ϑείου λαμβάνων, ἐϰεῖσε φέϱεται. ϰαὶ τοῦτο οὐϰ ἀπειϰότως ἔπαϑον. ὁϱῶντες γὰϱ οὔτε πληϑυνόμενον οὔτε ἐλαττούμενόν τι τῶν πεϱὶ τὸν οὐϱανὸν οὔτε τϱεπόμενον οὔτε πάϑος ὑπομένον τι τῶν ἀτάϰτων, ἀλλ̓ ἐναϱμόνιον μὲν αὐτοῦ τὴν ϰίνησιν, ἐμμελῆ δὲ τὴν τάξιν, [69c]ὡϱισμένους δὲ φωτισμοὺς σελήνης, ἡλίου δὲ ἀνατολὰς ϰαὶ δύσεις ὡϱισμένας ἐν ὡϱισμένοις ἀεὶ ϰαιϱοῖς, εἰϰότως ϑεὸν ϰαὶ ϑεοῦ ϑϱόνον ὑπέλαβον. τὸ γὰϱ τοιοῦτον, ἅτε μηδεμιᾷ πϱοσϑήϰῃ πληϑυνόμενον μηδὲ ἐλαττούμενον ἀφαιϱέσει, τῆς τε ϰατ̓ ἀλλοίωσιν ϰαὶ τϱοπὴν ἐϰτὸς ἱστάμενον μεταβολῆς πάσης ϰαϑαϱεύει φϑοϱᾶς ϰαὶ γενέσεως, ἀϑάνατον δὲ ὂν φύσει ϰαὶ ἀνώλεϑϱον παντοίας ἐστὶ ϰαϑαϱὸν ϰηλῖδος: ἀίδιον δὲ ϰαὶ ἀειϰίνητον, ὡς ὁϱῶμεν, ἤτοι [69d]παϱὰ ψυχῆς ϰϱείττονος ϰαὶ ϑειοτέϱας ἐνοιϰούσης αὐτῷ, ὥσπεϱ, οἶμαι, τὰ ἡμέτεϱα σώματα παϱὰ τῆς ἐν ἡμῖν ψυχῆς, φέϱεται ϰύϰλῳ πεϱὶ τὸν μέγαν δημιουϱγόν, ἢ πϱὸς αὐτοῦ τοῦ ϑεοῦ τὴν ϰίνησιν παϱαδεξάμενον τὸν ἄπειϱον ἐξελίττει ϰύϰλον ἀπαύστῳ ϰαὶ αἰωνίῳ φοϱᾷ. [44a]Οὐϰοῦν Ἕλληνες μὲν τοὺς μύϑους ἔπλασαν ὑπὲϱ τῶν ϑεῶν ἀπίστους ϰαὶ τεϱατώδεις. ϰαταπιεῖν [44b]γὰϱ ἔφασαν τὸν Κϱόνον τοὺς παῖδας εἶτ̓ αὖϑις ἐμέσαι. ϰαὶ γάμους ἤδη παϱανόμους: μητϱὶ γὰϱ ὁ Ζεὺς ἐμίχϑη ϰαὶ παιδοποιησάμενος ἐξ αὐτῆς ἔγημε μὲν αὐτὸς τὴν αὑτοῦ ϑυγατέϱα, μᾶλλον δὲ οὐδὲ ἔγημεν, ἀλλὰ μιχϑεὶς ἁπλῶς ἄλλῳ παϱαδέδωϰεν αὐτήν. εἶτα οἱ Διονύσου σπαϱαγμοὶ ϰαὶ μελῶν ϰολλήσεις. τοιαῦτα οἱ μῦϑοι τῶν Ἑλλήνων [75a]φασίν. τούτοις παϱάβαλλε τὴν Ἰουδαϊϰὴν διδασϰαλίαν, ϰαὶ τὸν φυτευόμενον ὑπὸ τοῦ ϑεοῦ παϱάδεισον ϰαὶ τὸν ὑπ̓ αὐτοῦ πλαττόμενον Ἀδάμ, εἶτα τὴν γινομένην αὐτῷ γυναῖϰα. λέγει γὰϱ ὁ ϑεός „Οὐ ϰαλὸν εἶναι τὸν ἄνϑϱωπον μόνον: ποιήσωμεν αὐτῷ βοηϑὸν ϰατ̓ αὐτόν,“ πϱὸς οὐδὲν μὲν αὐτῷ τῶν ὅλων βοηϑήσασαν, ἐξαπατήσασαν δὲ ϰαὶ γενομένην παϱαίτιον αὐτῷ τε ἐϰείνῳ ϰαὶ ἑαυτῇ [75b]τοῦ πεσεῖν ἔξω τῆς τοῦ παϱαδείσου τϱυφῆς. Ταῦτα γάϱ ἐστι μυϑώδη παντελῶς. ἐπεὶ πῶς εὔλογον ἀγνοεῖν τὸν ϑεόν, ὅτι τὸ γινόμενον ὑπ̓ αὐτοῦ πϱὸς βοήϑειαν οὐ πϱὸς ϰαλοῦ μᾶλλον, ἀλλὰ [86a]πϱὸς ϰαϰοῦ τῷ λαβόντι γενήσεται; τὸν γὰϱ ὄφιν τὸν διαλεγόμενον πϱὸς τὴν Εὔαν ποδαπῇ τινι χϱῆσϑαι φήσομεν διαλέϰτῳ; ἆϱα ἀνϑϱωπείᾳ; ϰαὶ τί διαφέϱει τῶν παϱὰ τοῖς Ἕλλησι πεπλασμένων [89a]μύϑων τὰ τοιαῦτα; τὸ δὲ ϰαὶ τὸν ϑεὸν ἀπαγοϱεύειν τὴν διάγνωσιν ϰαλοῦ τε ϰαὶ φαύλου τοῖς ὑπ̓ αὐτοῦ πλασϑεῖσιν ἀνϑϱώποις ἆῤ οὐχ ὑπεϱβολὴν ἀτοπίας ἔχει; τί γὰϱ ἂν ἠλιϑιώτεϱον γένοιτο τοῦ μὴ δυναμένου διαγινώσϰειν ϰαλὸν ϰαὶ πονηϱόν; δῆλον γάϱ, ὅτι τὰ μὲν οὐ φεύξεται, λέγω δὲ τὰ ϰαϰά, τὰ δὲ οὐ μεταδιώξει, λέγω δὲ τὰ ϰαλά. ϰεφάλαιον δέ, φϱονήσεως ἀπηγόϱευσεν ὁ ϑεὸς ἀνϑϱώπῳ γεύσασϑαι, ἧς οὐδὲν ἂν εἴη τιμιώτεϱον [89b]ἀνϑϱώπῳ. ὅτι γὰϱ ἡ τοῦ ϰαλοῦ ϰαὶ τοῦ χείϱονος διάγνωσις οἰϰεῖόν ἐστιν ἔϱγον φϱονήσεως, πϱόδηλόν [93d]ἐστί που ϰαὶ τοῖς ἀνοήτοις: ὥστε τὸν ὄφιν εὐεϱγέτην μᾶλλον, ἀλλ̓ οὐχὶ λυμεῶνα τῆς ἀνϑϱωπίνης [93e]γενέσεως εἶναι. ἐπὶ τούτοις ὁ ϑεὸς δεῖ λέγεσϑαι βάσϰανος. ἐπειδὴ γὰϱ εἶδε μετασχόντα τῆς φϱονήσεως τὸν ἄνϑϱωπον, ἵνα μή, φησί, γεύσηται τοῦ ξύλου τῆς ζωῆς, ἐξέβαλεν αὐτὸν τοῦ παϱαδείσου διαϱϱήδην εἰπών: „Ἰδού, Ἀδὰμ γέγονεν ὡς εἷς ἐξ ἡμῶν τοῦ γινώσϰειν ϰαλὸν ϰαὶ πονηϱόν. ϰαὶ νῦν μήποτε ἐϰτείνῃ τὴν χεῖϱα ϰαὶ λάβῃ ἀπὸ τοῦ ξύλου τῆς ζωῆς ϰαὶ φάγῃ ϰαὶ ζήσεται εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα.“ [94a]τούτων τοίνυν ἕϰαστον εἰ μὴ μῦϑος ἔχων ϑεωϱίαν ἀπόϱϱητον εἴη, ὅπεϱ ἐγὼ νενόμιϰα, πολλῆς γέμουσιν οἱ λόγοι πεϱὶ τοῦ ϑεοῦ βλασφημίας. τὸ γὰϱ ἀγνοῆσαι μέν, ὡς ἡ γινομένη βοηϑὸς αἰτία τοῦ πτώματος ἔσται ϰαὶ τὸ ἀπαγοϱεῦσαι ϰαλοῦ ϰαὶ πονηϱοῦ γνῶσιν, ὃ μόνον ἔοιϰε συνέχειν τὸν νοῦν τὸν ἀνϑϱώπινον, ϰαὶ πϱόσετι τὸ ζηλοτυπῆσαι, μὴ τοῦ ξύλου τῆς ζωῆς μεταλαβὼν ἄνϑϱωπος ἀϑάνατος ἐϰ ϑνητοῦ γένηται, φϑονεϱοῦ ϰαὶ βασϰάνου λίαν ἐστίν. [96c]Ὑπὲϱ δὲ ὧν ἐϰεῖνοί τε ἀληϑῶς δοξάξουσιν ἡμῖν τε ἐξ ἀϱχῆς οἱ πατέϱες παϱέδοσαν, ὁ μὲν ἡμέτεϱος ἔχει λόγος ὡδὶ τὸν πϱοσεχῆ τοῦ ϰόσμου τούτου δημιουϱγόν... ὑπὲϱ γὰϱ ϑεῶν τῶν ἀνωτέϱω τούτου Μωυσῆς μὲν εἴϱηϰεν οὐδὲν ὅλως, ὅς γε οὐδὲ ὑπὲϱ [96d]τῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων ἐτόλμησέ τι φύσεως: ἀλλ̓ ὅτι μὲν λειτουϱγοῦσι τῷ ϑεῷ πολλαχῶς ϰαὶ πολλάϰις εἶπεν, εἴτε δὲ γεγονότες, εἴτε ἀγένητοι, εἴτε ὑπ̓ ἄλλου μὲν γεγονότες, ἄλλῳ δὲ λειτουϱγεῖν τεταγμένοι, εἴτε ἄλλως πως, οὐδαμόϑεν διώϱισται. πεϱὶ δὲ οὐϱανοῦ ϰαὶ γῆς ϰαὶ τῶν ἐν αὐτῇ τίνα τϱόπον διεϰοσμήϑη διέξεισι. ϰαὶ τὰ μέν φησι ϰελεῦσαι τὸν ϑεὸν γενέσϑαι, ὥσπεϱ φῶς ϰαὶ στεϱέωμα, τὰ δὲ ποιῆσαι, ὥσπεϱ οὐϱανὸν ϰαὶ γῆν, [96e]ἥλιόν τε ϰαὶ σελήνην, τὰ δὲ ὄντα, ϰϱυπτόμενα δὲ τέως, διαϰϱῖναι, ϰαϑάπεϱ ὕδωϱ, οἶμαι, ϰαὶ τὴν ξηϱάν. πϱὸς τούτοις δὲ οὐδὲ πεϱὶ γενέσεως ἢ πεϱὶ ποιήσεως τοῦ πνεύματος εἰπεῖν ἐτόλμησεν, ἀλλὰ μόνον „Καὶ πνεῦμα ϑεοῦ ἐπεφέϱετο ἐπάνω τοῦ ὕδατος’: πότεϱον δὲ ἀγένητόν ἐστιν ἢ γέγονεν, οὐδὲν διασαφεῖ. [49a]Ἐνταῦϑα παϱαβάλωμεν, εἰ βούλεσϑε, τὴν Πλάτωνος φωνήν. τί τοίνυν οὗτος ὑπὲϱ τοῦ δημιουϱγοῦ λέγει ϰαὶ τίνας πεϱιτίϑησιν αὐτῷ φωνὰς ἐν τῇ ϰοσμογενείᾳ σϰόπησον, ἵνα τὴν Πλάτωνος ϰαὶ Μωυσέως ϰοσμογένειαν ἀντιπαϱαβάλωμεν ἀλλήλαις. οὕτω γὰϱ ἂν φανείη, τίς ὁ ϰϱείττων ϰαὶ τίς ἄξιος τοῦ ϑεοῦ μᾶλλον, ἆῤ ὁ τοῖς εἰδώλοις λελατϱευϰὼς Πλάτων ἢ πεϱὶ οὗ φησιν ἡ [49b]γϱαφή, ὅτι στόμα ϰατὰ στόμα ὁ ϑεὸς ἐλάλησεν αὐτῷ. „Ἐν ἀϱχῇ ἐποίησεν ὁ ϑεὸς τὸν οὐϱανὸν ϰαὶ τὴν γῆν. ἡ δὲ γῆ ἦν ἀόϱατος ϰαὶ ἀϰατασϰεύαστος, ϰαὶ σϰότος ἐπάνω τῆς ἀβύσσου, ϰαὶ πνεῦμα ϑεοῦ ἐπεφέϱετο ἐπάνω τοῦ ὕδατος. ϰαὶ εἶπεν ὁ ϑεός Γενηϑήτω φῶς, ϰαὶ ἐγένετο φῶς. ϰαὶ εἶδεν ὁ ϑεὸς τὸ φῶς, ὅτι ϰαλόν. ϰαὶ διεχώϱισεν ὁ ϑεὸς ἀνὰ μέσον τοῦ φωτὸς ϰαὶ ἀνὰ μέσον τοῦ σϰότους. ϰαὶ ἐϰάλεσεν ὁ ϑεὸς τὸ φῶς ἡμέϱαν ϰαὶ τὸ σϰότος ἐϰάλεσε νύϰτα. ϰαὶ ἐγένετο ἑσπέϱα ϰαὶ ἐγένετο πϱωί, ἡμέϱα μία. ϰαὶ εἶπεν ὁ ϑεός: Γενηϑήτω“ [49c]‘στεϱέωμα ἐν μέσῳ τοῦ ὕδατος. ϰαὶ ἐϰάλεσεν ὁ ϑεὸς τὸ στεϱέωμα οὐϱανόν. ϰαὶ εἶπεν ὁ ϑεός: Συναχϑήτω τὸ ὕδωϱ τὸ ὑποϰάτω τοῦ οὐϱανοῦ εἰς συναγωγὴν μίαν ϰαὶ ὀφϑήτω ἡ ξηϱά. ϰαὶ ἐγένετο οὕτως. ϰαὶ εἶπεν ὁ ϑεός: Βλαστησάτω ἡ γῆ βοτάνην χόϱτου ϰαὶ ξύλον ϰάϱπιμον. ϰαὶ εἶπεν ὁ ϑεός: Γενηϑήτωσαν φωστῆϱες ἐν τῷ στεϱεώματι τοῦ οὐϱανοῦ, ἵνα ὦσιν εἰς φαῦσιν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς. ϰαὶ ἔϑετο αὐτοὺς ὁ ϑεὸς ἐν τῷ στεϱεώματι τοῦ“ [49d]„οὐϱανοῦ, ὥστε ἄϱχειν τῆς ἡμέϱας ϰαὶ τῆς νυϰτός.“ Ἐν δὴ τούτοις Μωυσῆς οὔτε τὴν ἄβυσσον πεποιῆσϑαί φησιν ὑπὸ τοῦ ϑεοῦ οὔτε τὸ σϰότος οὔτε τὸ ὕδωϱ: ϰαίτοι χϱῆν δήπουϑεν εἰπόντα πεϱὶ  τοῦ φωτός, ὅτι πϱοστάξαντος ϑεοῦ γέγονεν, εἰπεῖν ἔτι ϰαὶ πεϱὶ τῆς νυϰτὸς ϰαὶ πεϱὶ τῆς ἀβύσσου ϰαὶ πεϱὶ τοῦ ὕδατος. ὁ δὲ οὐδὲν εἶπεν ὡς πεϱὶ οὐ γεγονότων ὅλως, ϰαίτοι πολλάϰις ἐπιμνησϑεὶς αὐτῶν. πϱὸς τούτοις οὔτε τῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων μέμνηται γενέσεως ἢ ποιήσεως οὐδ̓ ὅντινα τϱόπον [49e]παϱήχϑησαν, ἀλλὰ τῶν πεϱὶ τὸν οὐϱανὸν μόνον ϰαὶ πεϱὶ τὴν γῆν σωμάτων, ὡς εἶναι τὸν ϑεὸν ϰατὰ τὸν Μωυσέα ἀσωμάτων μὲν οὐδενὸς ποιητήν, ὕλης δὲ ὑποϰειμένης ϰοσμήτοϱα. τὸ γὰϱ „Ἡ δὲ γῆ ἦν ἀόϱατος ϰαὶ ἀϰατασϰεύαστος“ οὐδὲν ἕτεϱόν ἐστιν ἢ τὴν μὲν ὑγϱὰν ϰαὶ ξηϱὰν οὐσίαν ὕλην ποιοῦντος, ϰοσμήτοϱα δὲ αὐτῆς τὸν ϑεὸν εἰσάγοντος. [57b]Ὅ γε μὴν Πλάτων ἄϰουε πεϱὶ τοῦ ϰόσμου τί [57c]φησιν. „Ὁ δὴ πᾶς οὐϱανὸς ἢ ϰόσμος—ἢ ϰαὶ ἄλλο, ὅ τί ποτε ὀνομαζόμενος μάλιστα ἂν δέχοιτο, τοῦτο ἡμῖν ὠνομάσϑω—πότεϱον ἦν ἀεί, γενέσεως ἀϱχὴν ἔχων οὐδεμίαν, ἢ γέγονεν, ἀπ̓ ἀϱχῆς τινος ἀϱξάμενος; γέγονεν: ὁϱατὸς γὰϱ ἅπτος τέ ἐστι ϰαὶ σῶμα ἔχων. πάντα δὲ τὰ τοιαῦτα αἰσϑητά, τὰ δὲ αἰσϑητά, δόξῃ πεϱιληπτὰ μετὰ αἰσϑήσεως, γιγνόμενα ϰαὶ γεννητὰ ἐφάνη ... οὕτως οὖν ϰατὰ τὸν λόγον τὸν εἰϰότα δεῖ λέγειν τόνδε τὸν ϰόσμον ζῷον ἔμψυχον ἔννουν τε τῇ ἀληϑείᾳ διὰ τὴν τοῦ’ [57d]„ϑεοῦ γενέσϑαι πϱόνοιαν.“ [57e]Ἕν δὲ ἑνὶ παϱαβάλωμεν μόνον: τίνα ϰαὶ ποδαπὴν ποιεῖται δημηγοϱίαν ὁ ϑεὸς ὁ παϱὰ Μωυσῇ ϰαὶ ποδαπὴν ὁ παϱὰ Πλάτωνι; [58a]‘Καὶ εἶπεν ὁ ϑεός: Ποιήσωμεν ἄνϑϱωπον ϰατ̓ εἰϰόνα ἡμετέϱαν ϰαὶ ϰαϑ̓ ὁμοίωσιν. ϰαὶ ἀϱχέτωσαν τῶν ἰχϑύων τῆς ϑαλάσσης ϰαὶ τῶν πετεινῶν τοῦ οὐϱανοῦ ϰαὶ τῶν ϰτηνῶν ϰαὶ πάσης τῆς γῆς ϰαὶ πάντων τῶν ἑϱπετῶν τῶν ἑϱπόντων ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς. ϰαὶ ἐποίησεν ὁ ϑεὸς τὸν ἄνϑϱωπον, ϰατ̓ εἰϰόνα ϑεοῦ ἐποίησεν αὐτόν: ἄϱσεν ϰαὶ ϑῆλυ ἐποίησεν αὐτοὺς λέγων: Αὐξάνεσϑε ϰαὶ πληϑύνεσϑε ϰαὶ πληϱώσατε τῆν γῆν ϰαὶ ϰαταϰυϱιεύσατε αὐτῆς.“ [58b]„ϰαὶ ἀϱχέτωσαν τῶν ἰχϑύων τῆς ϑαλάσσης ϰαὶ τῶν πετεινῶν τοῦ οὐϱανοῦ ϰαὶ πάντων τῶν ϰτηνῶν ϰαὶ πάσης τῆς γῆς.“ Ἄϰουε δὴ οὖν ϰαὶ τῆς Πλατωνιϰῆς δημηγοϱίας, ἣν τῷ τῶν ὅλων πεϱιτίϑησι δημιουϱγῷ. „Θεοὶ ϑεῶν, ὧν ἐγὼ δημιουϱγὸς πατήϱ τε ἔϱγων ἄλυτα ἔσται ἐμοῦ γε ἐϑέλοντος. τὸ μὲν δὴ δεϑὲν πᾶν λυτόν, τό γε μὴν ϰαλῶς ἁϱμοσϑὲν ϰαὶ ἔχον εὖ λύειν ἐϑέλειν ϰαϰοῦ. διὸ ἐπείπεϱ γεγένησϑε, οὐϰ ἀϑάνατοι μέν ἐστε οὐδὲ ἄλυτοι τὸ πάμπαν, οὔτι γε μὴν λυϑήσεσϑε οὐδὲ τεύξεσϑε ϑανάτου μοίϱας,“ [58c]‘τῆς ἐμῆς βουλήσεως μείζονος ἔτι δεσμοῦ ϰαὶ ϰυϱιωτέϱου λαχόντες ἐϰείνων, οἷς ὅτε ἐγίνεσϑε ξυνεδεῖσϑε. νῦν οὖν ὃ λέγω πϱὸς ὑμᾶς ἐνδειϰνύμενος μάϑετε. ϑνητὰ ἔτι γένη λοιπὰ τϱία ἀγέννητα, τούτων δὲ μὴ γενομένων οὐϱανὸς ἀτελὴς ἔσται. τὰ γὰϱ πάντα ἐν αὑτῷ γένη ζῴων οὐχ ἕξει: ὑπ̓ ἐμοῦ δὲ ταῦτα γενόμενα ϰαὶ βίου μετασχόντα ϑεοῖς ἰσάζοιτο ἄν. ἵν̓ οὖν ϑνητά τε ᾖ τό τε πᾶν τόδε ὄντως ἅπαν ᾖ, τϱέπεσϑε ϰατὰ φύσιν ὑμεῖς ἐπὶ τὴν τῶν ζῴων δημιουϱγίαν, μιμούμενοι“ [58d]‘τὴν ἐμὴν δύναμιν πεϱὶ τὴν ὑμετέϱαν γένεσιν. ϰαὶ ϰαϑ̓ ὅσον μὲν αὐτῶν ἀϑανάτοις ὁμώνυμον εἶναι πϱοσήϰει, ϑεῖον λεγόμενον ἡγεμονοῦν τε ἐν αὐτοῖς τῶν ἀεὶ δίϰῃ ϰαὶ ὑμῖν ἐϑελόντων ἕπεσϑαι, σπείϱας ϰαὶ ὑπαϱξάμενος ἐγὼ παϱαδώσω. τὸ δὲ λοιπὸν ὑμεῖς, ἀϑανάτῳ ϑνητὸν πϱοσυφαίνοντες ἀπεϱγάζεσϑε ζῷα ϰαὶ γεννᾶτε τϱοφήν τε διδόντες αὐξάνετε ϰαὶ φϑίνοντα πάλιν δέχεσϑε.“ [65a]Ἀλλ̓ ἆϱα μὴ τοῦτο ὄναϱ ἐστὶν ἐννοήσοντες [65b]αὐτὸ μαϑέτε. ϑεοὺς ὀνομάζει Πλάτων τοὺς ἐμφανεῖς, ἥλιον ϰαὶ σελήνην, ἄστϱα ϰαὶ οὐϱανόν, ἀλλ̓ οὗτοι τῶν ἀφανῶν εἰσιν εἰϰόνες: ὁ φαινόμενος τοῖς ὀφϑαλμοῖς ἡμῶν ἥλιος τοῦ νοητοῦ ϰαὶ μὴ φαινομένου, ϰαὶ πάλιν ἡ φαινομένη τοῖς ὀφϑαλμοῖς ἡμῶν σελήνη ϰαὶ τῶν ἄστϱων ἕϰαστον εἰϰόνες εἰσὶ τῶν νοητῶν. ἐϰείνους οὖν τοὺς νοητοὺς ϰαὶ [65c]ἀφανεῖς ϑεοὺς ἐνυπάϱχοντας ϰαὶ συνυπάϱχοντας ϰαὶ ἐξ αὐτοῦ τοῦ δημιουϱγοῦ γεννηϑέντας ϰαὶ πϱοελϑόντας ὁ Πλάτων οἶδεν. εἰϰότως οὖν φησιν ὁ δημιουϱγὸς ὁ παῤ αὐτῷ „ϑεοί,“ πϱὸς τοὺς ἀφανεῖς λέγων, „ϑεῶν,“ τῶν ἐμφανῶν δηλονότι. ϰοινὸς δὲ ἀμφοτέϱων δημιουϱγὸς οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ τεχνησάμενος οὐϱανὸν ϰαὶ γῆν ϰαὶ ϑάλασσαν ϰαὶ ἄστϱα ϰαὶ γεννήσας ἐν τοῖς νοητοῖς τὰ τούτων ἀϱχέτυπα. Σϰόπει οὖν, ὅτι ϰαὶ τὰ ἐπὶ τούτοις ϰαλῶς. „Λείπει“ γάϱ φησι „τϱία ϑνητὰ γένη,“ δηλονότι τὸ τῶν ἀνϑϱώπων ϰαὶ τὸ τῶν ζῴων ϰαὶ τὸ τῶν φυτῶν: τούτων γὰϱ ἕϰαστον ἰδίοις ὥϱισται λόγοις. „Εἰ μὲν οὖν“ φησι „ϰαὶ τούτων ἕϰαστον ὑπ̓ ἐμοῦ“ [65d]„γένοιτο, παντάπασιν ἀναγϰαῖον ἀϑάνατον αὐτὸ γενέσϑαι.“ ϰαὶ γὰϱ τοῖς νοητοῖς ϑεοῖς οὐδὲν ἄλλο τῆς ἀϑανασίας αἴτιον ϰαὶ τῷ φαινομένῳ ϰόσμῳ ἢ τὸ ὑπὸ τοῦ δημιουϱγοῦ γενέσϑαι. ὅτι οὖν φησιν „Ὁπόσον ἐστὶν ἀϑάνατον, ἀναγϰαῖόν ἐστι τούτοις παϱὰ τοῦ δημιουϱγοῦ δεδόσϑαι,“ τοῦτο δέ ἐστιν ἡ λογιϰὴ ψυχή. „Τὸ δὲ λοιπόν“ φησιν „ὑμεῖς“ [65e]„ἀϑανάτῳ ϑνητὸν πϱοσυφαίνετε.“ δῆλον οὖν ὅτι παϱαλαβόντες οἱ δημιουϱγιϰοὶ ϑεοὶ παϱὰ τοῦ σφῶν πατϱὸς τὴν δημιουϱγιϰὴν δύναμιν, ἀπεγέννησαν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς τὰ ϑνητὰ τῶν ζῴων. εἰ γὰϱ μηδὲν ἔμελλε διαφέϱειν οὐϱανὸς ἀνϑϱώπου ϰαὶ ναὶ μὰ Δία ϑηϱίου ϰαὶ τελευταῖον αὐτῶν τῶν ἑϱπετῶν ϰαὶ τῶν ἐν τῇ ϑαλάσσῃ νηχομένων ἰχϑυδίων, ἔδει τὸν δημιουϱγὸν ἕνα ϰαὶ τὸν αὐτὸν εἶναι πάντων. εἰ δὲ πολὺ τὸ μέσον ἐστὶν ἀϑανάτων ϰαὶ [66a]ϑνητῶν, οὐδεμιᾷ πϱοσϑήϰῃ μεῖζον οὐδὲ ἀφαιϱέσει μειούμενον οὐδὲ μιγνύμενον πϱὸς τὰ ϑνητὰ ϰαὶ ἐπίϰηϱα αἴτιον εἶναι πϱοσήϰει τούτων μὲν ἄλλους, ἑτέϱων δὲ ἑτέϱους. Οὐϰοῦν ἐπειδήπεϱ οὐδὲ πεϱὶ τοῦ πϱοσεχοῦς τοῦ ϰόσμου τούτου δημιουϱγοῦ πάντα διειλεγμένος Μωυσῆς φαίνεται, τήν τε Ἑβϱαίων ϰαὶ τὴν τῶν [99e]ἡμετέϱων πατέϱων δόξαν ὑπὲϱ ἐϑνῶν τούτων ἀντιπαϱαϑῶμεν ἀλλήλαις. Ὁ Μωυσῆς φησι τὸν τοῦ ϰόσμου δημιουϱγὸν ἐϰλέξασϑαι τὸ τῶν Ἑβϱαίων ἔϑνος ϰαὶ πϱοσέχειν ἐϰείνῳ μόνῳ ϰαὶ ἐϰείνου φϱοντίσαι ϰαὶ δίδωσιν αὐτῷ τὴν ἐπιμέλειαν αὐτοῦ μόνου. τῶν δὲ ἄλλων ἐϑνῶν, ὅπως ἢ ὑφ̓ οἷστισι διοιϰοῦνται ϑεοῖς, οὐδ̓ ἡντινοῦν μνείαν πεποίηται: πλὴν εἰ μή τις ἐϰεῖνα συγχωϱήσειεν, ὅτι τὸν ἥλιον αὐτοῖς ϰαὶ τὴν σελήνην ἀπένειμεν. ἀλλ̓ ὑπὲϱ μὲν τούτων ϰαὶ μιϰϱὸν [100a]ὕστεϱον. πλὴν ὅτι τοῦ Ἰσϱαὴλ αὐτὸν μόνου ϑεὸν ϰαὶ τῆς Ἰουδαίας ϰαὶ τούτους ἐϰλεϰτούς φησιν αὐτός τε ϰαὶ οἱ μετ̓ ἐϰεῖνον πϱοφῆται ϰαὶ Ἰησοῦς ὁ Ναζωϱαῖος ἐπιδείξω, ἀλλὰ ϰαὶ τὸν πάντας πανταχοῦ τοὺς πώποτε γόητας ϰαὶ ἀπατεῶνας ὑπεϱβαλλόμενον Παῦλον. ἀϰούετε δὲ τῶν λέξεων αὐτῶν, ϰαὶ πϱῶτον μὲν τῶν Μωυσέως: „Σὺ δὲ ἐϱεῖς τῷ Φαϱαῷ: υἱὸς πϱωτότοϰός μου Ἰσϱαήλ. εἶπον δέ: ἐξαπόστειλον τὸν λαόν μου, ἵνα μοι“ [100b]„λατϱεύσῃ. σὺ δὲ οὐϰ ἐβούλου ἐξαποστεῖλαι αὐτόν.“ ϰαὶ μιϰϱὸν ὕστεϱον: „Καὶ λέγουσιν αὐτῷ: ὁ ϑεὸς τῶν Ἑβϱαίων πϱοσϰέϰληται ἡμᾶς. ποϱευσόμεϑα οὖν εἰς τὴν ἔϱημον ὁδὸν ἡμεϱῶν τϱιῶν, ὅπως ϑύσωμεν ϰυϱίῳ τῷ ϑεῷ ἡμῶν.“ ϰαὶ μετ̓ ὀλίγα πάλιν ὁμοίως: „Κύϱιος ὁ ϑεὸς τῶν Ἑβϱαίων ἐξαπέσταλϰέ με πϱὸς σὲ λέγων: ἐξαπόστειλον  τὸν λαόν μου, ἵνα λατϱεύσωσιν ἐν τῇ ἐϱήμῳ.“ [106a]Ἀλλ̓ ὅτι μὲν Ἰουδαίων μόνων ἐμέλησε τῷ [106b]ϑεῷ τὸ ἐξ ἀϱχῆς ϰαὶ ϰλῆϱος αὐτοῦ γέγονεν οὗτος ἐξαίϱετος, οὐ Μωυσῆς μόνον ϰαὶ Ἰησοῦς, ἀλλὰ ϰαὶ Παῦλος εἰϱηϰὼς φαίνεται: ϰαίτοι τοῦτο ἄξιον ϑαυμάσαι πεϱὶ τοῦ Παύλου. πϱὸς γὰϱ τύχας, ὥσπεϱ χϱῶτα οἱ πολύποδες πϱὸς τὰς πέτϱας, ἀλλάττει τὰ πεϱὶ ϑεοῦ δόγματα, ποτὲ μὲν Ἰουδαίους μόνον τὴν τοῦ ϑεοῦ ϰληϱονομίαν εἶναι διατεινόμενος, πάλιν δὲ τοὺς Ἕλληνας ἀναπείϑων αὑτῷ πϱοστίϑεσϑαι, λέγων: „Μὴ Ἰουδαίων ὁ ϑεὸς μόνον, ἀλλὰ ϰαὶ ἐϑνῶν: ναὶ ϰαὶ ἐϑνῶν.“ δίϰαιον [106c]οὖν ἐϱέσϑαι τὸν Παῦλον, εἰ μὴ τῶν Ἰουδαίων ἦν ὁ ϑεὸς μόνον, ἀλλὰ ϰαὶ τῶν ἐϑνῶν, τοῦ χάϱιν πολὺ μὲν εἰς τοὺς Ἰουδαίους ἔπεμπε τὸ πϱοφητιϰὸν χάϱισμα ϰαὶ τὸν Μωυσέα ϰαὶ τὸ χϱῖσμα ϰαὶ τοὺς πϱοφήτας ϰαὶ τὸν νόμον ϰαὶ τὰ παϱάδοξα ϰαὶ τὰ τεϱάστια τῶν μύϑων; ἀϰούεις γὰϱ αὐτῶν βοώντων: „Ἄϱτον ἀγγέλων ἔφαγεν ἄνϑϱωπος.“ ἐπὶ τέλους δὲ ϰαὶ τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἔπεμψεν ἐϰείνοις, ἡμῖν δὲ οὐ πϱοφήτην, οὐ χϱῖσμα, οὐ διδάσϰαλον, οὐ ϰήϱυϰα πεϱὶ τῆς μελλούσης ὀψέ ποτε γοῦν ἔσεσϑαι [106d]ϰαὶ εἰς ἡμᾶς ἀπ̓ αὐτοῦ φιλανϑϱωπίας. ἀλλὰ ϰαὶ πεϱιεῖδεν ἐτῶν μυϱιάδας, εἰ δὲ ὑμεῖς βούλεσϑε, χιλιάδας ἐν ἀγνωσίᾳ τοιαύτῃ τοῖς εἰδώλοις, ὥς φατε, λατϱεύοντας τοὺς ἀπὸ ἀνίσχοντος ἡλίου μέχϱι δυομένου ϰαὶ τοὺς ἀπὸ τῶν ἄϱϰτων ἄχϱι μεσημβϱίας ἔξω ϰαὶ μιϰϱοῦ γένους οὐδὲ πϱὸ δισχιλίων ὅλων ἐτῶν ἐν ἑνὶ μέϱει συνοιϰισϑέντος τῆς Παλαιστίνης. εἰ γὰϱ πάντων ἡμῶν ἐστι ϑεὸς ϰαὶ πάντων δημιουϱγὸς ὁμοίως, τί πεϱιεῖδεν [100c]ἡμᾶς; πϱοσήϰει τοίνυν τὸν τῶν Ἑβϱαίων ϑεὸν οὐχὶ δὴ παντὸς ϰόσμου γενεσιουϱγὸν ὑπάϱχειν οἴεσϑαι ϰαὶ ϰατεξουσιάζειν τῶν ὅλων, συνεστάλϑαι δέ, ὡς ἔφην, ϰαὶ πεπεϱασμένην ἔχοντα τὴν [53]ἀϱχὴν ἀναμὶξ τοῖς ἄλλοις νοεῖσϑαι ϑεοῖς. ἔτι 54 πϱοσέξομεν ὑμῖν, ὅτι τὸν τῶν ὅλων ϑεὸν ἄχϱι ψιλῆς γοῦν ἐννοίας ὑμεῖς ἢ τῆς ὑμετέϱας τις ἐφαντάσϑη ῥίζης; οὐ μεϱιϰὰ πάντα ταῦτά ἐστι; ϑεὸς ζηλωτής: ζηλοῖ γὰϱ διὰ τί ϰαὶ ἁμαϱτίας ἐϰδιϰῶν πατέϱων ἐπὶ τέϰνα; [115d]Ἀλλὰ δὴ σϰοπεῖτε πϱὸς ταῦτα πάλιν τὰ παῤ ἡμῶν. οἱ γὰϱ ἡμέτεϱοι τὸν δημιουϱγόν φασιν ἁπάντων μὲν εἶναι ϰοινὸν πατέϱα ϰαὶ βασιλέα, νενεμῆσϑαι δὲ ὑπ̓ αὐτοῦ τὰ λοιπὰ τῶν ἐϑνῶν ἐϑνάϱχαις ϰαὶ πολιούχοις ϑεοῖς, ὧν ἕϰαστος ἐπιτϱοπεύει τὴν ἑαυτοῦ λῆξιν οἰϰείως ἑαυτῷ. ἐπειδὴ [115e]γὰϱ ἐν μὲν τῷ πατϱὶ πάντα τέλεια ϰαὶ ἓν πάντα, ἐν δὲ τοῖς μεϱιστοῖς ἄλλη παῤ ἄλλῳ ϰϱατεῖ δύναμις, Ἄϱης μὲν ἐπιτϱοπεύει τὰ πολεμιϰὰ τῶν ἐϑνῶν, Ἀϑηνᾶ δὲ τὰ μετὰ φϱονήσεως πολεμιϰά, Ἑϱμῆς δὲ τὰ συνετώτεϱα μᾶλλον ἢ τολμηϱότεϱα, ϰαὶ ϰαϑ̓ ἑϰάστην οὐσίαν τῶν οἰϰείων ϑεῶν ἕπεται ϰαὶ τὰ ἐπιτϱοπευόμενα παϱὰ σφῶν ἔϑνη. εἰ μὲν οὖν οὐ μαϱτυϱεῖ τοῖς ἡμετέϱοις λόγοις ἡ πεῖϱα, πλάσμα μὲν ἔστω τὰ παῤ ἡμῶν ϰαὶ πιϑανότης [116a]ἄϰαιϱος, τὰ παῤ ὑμῖν δὲ ἐπαινείσϑω: εἰ δὲ πᾶν τοὐναντίον οἷς μὲν ἡμεῖς λέγομεν, ἐξ αἰῶνος ἡ πεῖϱα μαϱτυϱεῖ, τοῖς ὑμετέϱοις δὲ λόγοις οὐδὲν οὐδαμοῦ φαίνεται σύμφωνον, τί τοσαύτης τῆς φιλονειϰίας ἀντέχεσϑε; Λεγέσϑω γάϱ μοι, τίς αἰτία τοῦ Κελτοὺς μὲν εἶναι ϰαὶ Γεϱμανοὺς ϑϱασεῖς, Ἕλληνας δὲ ϰαὶ Ῥωμαίους ὡς ἐπίπαν πολιτιϰοὺς ϰαὶ φιλανϑϱώπους μετὰ τοῦ στεϱϱοῦ τε ϰαὶ πολεμιϰοῦ, συνετωτέϱους δὲ ϰαὶ τεχνιϰωτέϱους Αἰγυπτίους, ἀπολέμους δὲ ϰαὶ τϱυφηλοὺς Σύϱους μετὰ τοῦ συνετοῦ ϰαὶ ϑεϱμοῦ ϰαὶ ϰούφου ϰαὶ εὐμαϑοῦς. [116b]ταύτης γὰϱ τῆς ἐν τοῖς ἔϑνεσι διαφοϱᾶς εἰ μὲν οὐδεμίαν τις αἰτίαν συνοϱῴη, μᾶλλον δὲ αὐτά φησι ϰαὶ ἐϰ τοῦ αὐτομάτου συμπεσεῖν, πῶς ἔτι πϱονοίᾳ διοιϰεῖσϑαι τὸν ϰόσμον οἴεται; εἰ δὲ τούτων αἰτίας εἶναί τις τίϑεται, λεγέτω μοι πϱὸς [131b]αὐτοῦ τοῦ δημιουϱγοῦ ϰαὶ διδασϰέτω. τοὺς μὲν γὰϱ νόμους εὔδηλον, ὡς ἡ τῶν ἀνϑϱώπων ἔϑετο φύσις οἰϰείους ἑαυτῇ, πολιτιϰοὺς μὲν ϰαὶ φιλανϑϱώπους, [131c]οἷς ἐπὶ πλεῖστον ἐντέϑϱαπτο τὸ φιλάνϑϱωπον, ἀγϱίους δὲ ϰαὶ ἀπανϑϱώπους, οἷς ἐναντία φύσις ὑπῆν ϰαὶ ἐνυπῆϱχε τῶν ἠϑῶν. οἱ γὰϱ νομοϑέται μιϰϱὰ ταῖς φύσεσι ϰαὶ ταῖς ἐπιτηδειότησι διὰ τῆς ἀγωγῆς πϱοσέϑεσαν. οὔϰουν Ἀνάχαϱσιν οἱ Σϰύϑαι βαϰχεύοντα παϱεδέξαντο: οὐδὲ τῶν Ἑσπεϱίων ἐϑνῶν εὕϱοις ἄν τινας εὐϰόλως πλὴν ὀλίγων σφόδϱα ἐπὶ τὸ φιλοσοφεῖν ἢ γεωμετϱεῖν ἤ τι τῶν τοιούτων ηὐτϱεπισμένους, ϰαίτοι ϰϱατούσης ἐπὶ τοσοῦτον ἤδη τῆς Ῥωμαίων ἡγεμονίας. ἀλλ̓ ἀπολαύουσι μόνον τῆς διαλέξεως ϰαὶ [131d]τῆς ῥητοϱείας οἱ λίαν εὐφυεῖς, ἄλλου δὲ οὐδενὸς μεταλαμβάνουσι μαϑήματος. Οὕτως ῾̣̣̓σχυϱον ἔοιϰεν ἡ φύσις εἶναι. τίς οὖν ἡ διαφοϱὰ τῶν ἐϑνῶν ἐν τοῖς ἤϑεσι ϰαὶ τοῖς νόμοις; [134d]Ὁ μὲν γὰϱ Μωυσῆς αἰτίαν ἀποδέδωϰε ϰομιδῇ μυϑώδη τῆς πεϱὶ τὰς διαλέϰτους ἀνομοιότητος. ἔφη γὰϱ τοὺς υἱοὺς τῶν ἀνϑϱώπων συνελϑόντας [134e]πόλιν ἐϑέλειν οἰϰοδομεῖν ϰαὶ πύϱγον ἐν αὐτῇ μέγαν, φάναι δὲ τὸν ϑεόν, ὅτι χϱὴ ϰατελϑεῖν ϰαὶ τὰς διαλέϰτους αὐτῶν συγχέαι. ϰαὶ ὅπως μή τίς με νομίσῃ ταῦτα συϰοφαντεῖν, ϰαὶ ἐϰ τῶν Μωυσέως ἀναγνωσόμεϑα τὰ ἐφεξῆς. „Καὶ εἶπον: δεῦτε, οἰϰοδομήσωμεν ἑαυτοῖς πόλιν ϰαὶ πύϱγον, οὗ ἔσται ἡ ϰεφαλὴ ἕως τοῦ οὐϱανοῦ, ϰαὶ ποιήσωμεν ἑαυτοῖς ὄνομα πϱὸ τοῦ διασπαϱῆναι ἐπὶ πϱοσώπου πάσης τῆς γῆς. ϰαὶ ϰατέβη ϰύϱιος ἰδεῖν τὴν πόλιν ϰαὶ τὸν πύϱγον, ὃν ᾠϰοδόμησαν οἱ υἱοὶ τῶν ἀνϑϱώπων. ϰαὶ εἶπε ϰύϱιος: ἰδού, γένος ἓν ϰαὶ“ [135a]„χεῖλος ἓν πάντων, ϰαὶ τοῦτο ἤϱξαντο ποιῆσαι ϰαὶ νῦν οὐϰ ἐϰλείψει ἀπ̓ αὐτῶν πάντα, ὅσα ἂν ἐπίϑωνται ποιεῖν. δεῦτε, ϰαταβάντες ἐϰεῖ συγχέωμεν αὐτῶν τὴν γλῶσσαν, ἵνα μὴ ἀϰούωσιν ἕϰαστος τῆς φωνῆς τοῦ πλησίον. ϰαὶ διέσπειϱεν αὐτοὺς ϰύϱιος ὁ ϑεὸς ἐπὶ πϱόσωπον πάσης τῆς γῆς ϰαὶ ἐπαύσαντο οἰϰοδομοῦντες τὴν πόλιν ϰαὶ τὸν πύϱγον.“ εἶτα τούτοις ἀξιοῦτε πιστεύειν ἡμᾶς, ἀπιστεῖτε δὲ ὑμεῖς τοῖς ὑφ̓ Ὁμήϱου λεγομένοις ὑπὲϱ τῶν Ἀλωαδῶν, ὡς ἄϱα τϱία ἐπ̓ [135b]ἀλλήλοις ὄϱη ϑεῖναι διενοοῦντο, „ἵν̓ οὐϱανὸς ἀμβατὸς εἴη.“ φημὶ μὲν γὰϱ ἐγὼ ϰαὶ τοῦτο παϱαπλησίως ἐϰείνῳ μυϑῶδες εἶναι. ὑμεῖς δέ, ἀποδεχόμενοι τὸ πϱότεϱον, ἀνϑ̓ ὅτου πϱὸς ϑεῶν ἀποδοϰιμάζετε τὸν Ὁμήϱου μῆϑον; ἐϰεῖνο γὰϱ οἶμαι δεῖν σιωπᾶν πϱὸς ἄνδϱας ἀμαϑεῖς, ὅτι ϰἂν μιᾷ φωνῇ ϰαὶ γλώσσῃ πάντες οἱ ϰατὰ πᾶσαν τὴν οἰϰουμένην ἄνϑϱωποι χϱήσωνται, πύϱγον οἰϰοδομεῖν οὐ δυνήσονται πϱὸς τὸν οὐϱανὸν ἀφιϰνούμενον, ϰἂν ἐϰπλινϑεύσωσι τὴν γῆν πᾶσαν: [135c]ἀπείϱων γὰϱ δεήσει πλίνϑων ἰσομεγεϑῶν τῇ γῇ ξυμπάσῃ τῶν δυνησομένων ἄχϱι τῶν σελήνης ἐφιϰέσϑαι ϰύϰλων. ὑποϰείσϑω γὰϱ πάντας μὲν ἀνϑϱώπους συνεληλυϑέναι γλώσσῃ ϰαὶ φωνῇ μιᾷ ϰεχϱημένους, πᾶσαν δὲ ἐϰπλινϑεῦσαι τὴν γῆν ϰαὶ ἐϰλατομῆσαι, πότε ἂν μέχϱις οὐϱανοῦ φϑάσειεν, εἰ ϰαὶ λεπτότεϱον ἁϱπεδόνος ἐϰμηϱυομένων αὐτῶν ἐϰταϑείη; τοῦτον οὖν οὕτω φανεϱὸν ὄντα τὸν μῦϑον ἀληϑῆ νενομιϰότες ϰαὶ πεϱὶ τοῦ ϑεοῦ δοξάζοντες, ὅτι πεφόβηται τῶν ἀνϑϱώπων τὴν μιαιφονίαν [135d]τούτου τε χάϱιν ϰαταπεφοίτηϰεν αὐτῶν συγχέαι τὰς διαλέϰτους, ἔτι τολμᾶτε ϑεοῦ γνῶσιν αὐχεῖν; [137e]Ἐπάνειμι δὲ αὖϑις πϱὸς ἐϰεῖνο, τὰς μὲν γὰϱ διαλέϰτους ὅπως ὁ ϑεὸς συνέχεεν. εἴϱηϰεν ὁ Μωυσῆς τὴν μὲν αἰτίαν, ὅτι φοβηϑεὶς μή τι ϰατ̓ αὐτοῦ πϱάξωσι πϱοσβατὸν ἑαυτοῖς τὸν οὐϱανὸν [138a]ϰατεϱγασάμενοι, ὁμόγλωττοι ὄντες ϰαὶ ὁμόφϱονες ἀλλήλοις: τὸ δὲ πϱᾶγμα ὅπως ἐποίησεν οὐδαμῶς, ἀλλὰ μόνον, ὅτι ϰατελϑὼν ἐξ οὐϱανοῦ—μὴ δυνάμενος ἄνωϑεν αὐτὸ ποιεῖν, ὡς ἔοιϰεν, εἰ μὴ ϰατῆλϑεν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς. ὑπὲϱ δὲ τῆς ϰατὰ τὰ ἤϑη ϰαὶ τὰ νόμιμα διαφοϱᾶς οὔτε Μωυσῆς οὔτε ἄλλος ἀπεσάφησέ τις. ϰαίτοι τῷ παντὶ μείζων ἐστὶν ἡ πεϱὶ τὰ νόμιμα ϰαὶ τὰ πολιτιϰὰ τῶν ἐϑνῶν ἐν τοῖς ἀνϑϱώποις τῆς πεϱὶ τὰς διαλέϰτους διαφοϱᾶς. τίς [138b]γὰϱ Ἑλλήνων ἀδελφῇ, τίς δὲ ϑυγατϱί, τίς δὲ μητϱί φησι δεῖν μίγνυσϑαι ; τοῦτο δὲ ἀγαϑὸν ἐν Πέϱσαις ϰϱίνεται. τί με χϱῆ ϰαϑ̓ ἕϰαστον ἐπιέναι, τὸ φιλελεύϑεϱόν τε ϰαί ἀνυπόταϰτον Γεϱμανῶν ἐπέξιόντα, τὸ χειϱόηϑες ϰαὶ τιϑασὸν Σύϱων ϰαὶ Πεϱσῶν ϰαὶ Πάϱϑων ϰαὶ πάντων ἁπλῶς τῶν πϱὸς ἕω ϰαὶ πϱὸς μεσημβϱίαν βαϱβάϱων ϰαὶ ὅσα ϰαὶ τὰς βασιλείας ἀγαπᾷ ϰεϰτημένα δεσποτιϰωτέϱας ; εἰ μὲν οὖν ἄνευ πϱονοίας μείζονος ϰαὶ ϑειοτέϱας ταῦτα συνηνέχϑη τὰ μείζω ϰαὶ τιμιώτεϱα, τί [138c]μάτην πεϱιεϱγαζόμεϑα ϰαὶ ϑεϱαπεύομεν τὸν μηδὲν πϱονοοῦντα ; ᾧ γὰϱ οὔτε βίων οὔτε ἠϑῶν οὔτε τϱόπων οὔτε εὐνομίας οὔτε πολιτιϰῆς ἐμέλησε ϰαταστάσεως, ἆῤ ἔτι πϱοσήϰει μεταποιεῖσϑαι τῆς παῤ ἡμῶν τιμῆς ; οὐδαμῶς. ὁϱᾶτε, εἰς ὅσην ὑμῖν ἀτοπίαν ὁ λόγος ἔϱχεται. τῶν γὰϱ ἀγαϑῶν ὅσα πεϱὶ τὸν ἀνϑϱώπινον ϑεωϱεῖται βίον, ἡγεῖται μὲν τὰ τῆς ψυχῆς, ἕπεται δὲ τὰ τοῦ σώματος. εἰ τοίνυν τῶν ψυχιϰῶν ἡμῶν ἀγαϑῶν ϰατωλιγώϱησεν, οὐδὲ τῆς φυσιϰῆς ἡμῶν ϰατασϰευῆς πϱονοησάμενος, [138d]οὔτε ἡμῖν ἔπεμψε διδασϰάλους ἢ νομοϑέτας ὥσπεϱ τοῖς Ἑβϱαίοις ϰατὰ τὸν Μωυσέα ϰαὶ τοὺς ἐπ̓ ἐϰείνῳ πϱοφήτας, ὑπὲϱ τίνος ἕξομεν αὐτῷ ϰαλῶς εὐχαϱιστεῖν; [141c]Ἀλλ̓ ὁϱᾶτε, μή ποτε ϰαὶ ἡμῖν ἔδωϰεν ὁ ϑεὸς οὓς ὑμεῖς ἠγνοήϰατε ϑεούς τε ϰαὶ πϱοστάτας ἀγαϑούς, οὐδὲν ἐλάττονας τοῦ παϱὰ τοῖς Ἑβϱαίοις ἐξ ἀϱχῆς τιμωμένου τῆς Ἰουδαίας, ἧσπεϱ ἐϰεῖνος πϱονοεῖν ἔλαχε μόνης, ὥσπεϱ ὁ Μωυσῆς ἔφη ϰαὶ [141d]οἱ μετ̓ ἐϰεῖνον ἄχϱις ἡμῶν. εἰ δὲ ὁ πϱοσεχὴς εἴη τοῦ ϰόσμου δημιουϱγὸς ὁ παϱὰ τοῖς Ἑβϱαίοις τιμώμενος, ἔτι ϰαὶ βέλτιον ὑπὲϱ αὐτοῦ διενοήϑημεν ἡμεῖς ἀγαϑά τε ἡμῖν ἔδωϰεν ἐϰείνων μείζονα τά τε πεϱὶ ψυχὴν ϰαὶ τὰ ἐϰτός, ὑπὲϱ ὧν ἐϱοῦμεν ὀλίγου ὕστεϱον, ἔστειλέ τε ϰαὶ ἐφ̓ ἡμᾶς νομοϑέτας οὐδὲν Μωυσέως χείϱονας, εἰ μὴ τοὺς πολλοὺς μαϰϱῷ ϰϱείττονας. [143a]Ὅπεϱ οὖν ἐλέγομεν, εἰ μὴ ϰαϑ̓ ἕϰαστον ἔϑνος ἐϑνάϱχης τις ϑεὸς ἐπιτϱοπεύων ἄγγελός τε ὑπ̓ [143b]αὐτῷ ϰαὶ δαίμων ϰαὶ ἥϱως ϰαὶ ψυχῶν ἰδιάζον γένος ὑπηϱετιϰὸν ϰαὶ ὑπουϱγιϰὸν τοῖς ϰϱείττοσιν ἔϑετο τὴν ἐν τοῖς νόμοις ϰαὶ τοῖς ἤϑεσι διαφοϱότητα, δειϰνύσϑω, παῤ ἄλλου πῶς γέγονε ταῦτα. ϰαὶ γὰϱ οὐδὲ ἀπόχϱη λέγειν: „Εἶπεν ὁ ϑεὸς ϰαὶ ἐγένετο.“ ὁμολογεῖν γὰϱ χϱὴ τοῖς ἐπιτάγμασι τοῦ ϑεοῦ τῶν γινομένων τὰς φύσεις. ὃ δὲ λέγω, σαφέστεϱον ἐϱῶ. ἐϰέλευσεν ὁ ϑεὸς ἄνω φέϱεσϑαι τὸ πῦϱ, εἰ τύχοι, ϰάτω δὲ τὴν γῆν ; οὐχ ἵνα τὸ πϱόσταγμα γένηται τοῦ ϑεοῦ, τὸ μὲν ἐχϱῆν εἶναι ϰοῦφον, τὸ δὲ βϱίϑειν ; οὕτω ϰαὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἑτέϱων [143c]ὁμοίως... τὸν αὐτὸν τϱόπον ϰαὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ϑείων. αἴτιον δέ, ὅτι τὸ μὲν τῶν ἀνϑϱώπων ἐπίϰηϱόν ἐστι ϰαὶ φϑαϱτὸν γένος. εἰϰότως οὖν αὐτοῦ φϑαϱτὰ ϰαὶ τὰ ἔϱγα ϰαὶ μεταβλητὰ ϰαὶ παντοδαπῶς τϱεπόμενα: τοῦ ϑεοῦ δὲ ὑπάϱχοντος ἀϊδίου, ϰαὶ τὰ πϱοστάγματα τοιαῦτ̓ εἶναι πϱοσήϰει. τοιαῦτα δὲ ὄντα ἤτοι φύσεις εἰσὶ τῶν ὄντων ἢ τῇ φύσει τῶν ὄντων ὁμολογούμενα. πῶς γὰϱ ἂν ἡ φύσις τῷ πϱοστάγματι μάχοιτο τοῦ ϑεοῦ ; πῶς [143d]δ̓ ἂν ἔξω πίπτοι τῆς ὁμολογίας ; οὐϰοῦν εἰ ϰαὶ πϱοσέταξεν ὥσπεϱ τὰς γλώσσας συγχυϑῆναι ϰαὶ μὴ συμφωνεῖν ἀλλήλαις, οὕτω δὲ ϰαὶ τὰ πολιτιϰὰ τῶν ἐϑνῶν, οὐϰ ἐπιτάγματι δὲ μόνον ἐποίησε τοιαῦτα ϰαὶ πεφυϰέναι, οὐδὲ ἡμᾶς πϱὸς ταύτην ϰατεσϰεύασε τὴν διαφωνίαν. ἐχϱῆν γὰϱ πϱῶτον διαφόϱους ὑπεῖναι φύσεις τοῖς ἐν τοῖς ἔϑνεσι διαφόϱως ἐσομένοις. ὁϱᾶται γοῦν τοῦτο, ϰαὶ τοῖς σώμασιν εἴ τις ἀπίδοι Γεϱμανοὶ ϰαὶ Σϰύϑαι [143e]Λιβύων ϰαὶ Αἰϑιόπων ὁπόσον διαφέϱουσιν. ἆϱα ϰαὶ τοῦτό ἐστι ψιλὸν ἐπίταγμα, ϰαὶ οὐδὲν ὁ ἀὴϱ οὐδὲ ἡ χώϱα τῷ πῶς ἔχειν πϱὸς τὸ χϱῶμα ϑεοῖς συμπϱάττει; [146a]Ἔτι δὲ ϰαὶ ὁ Μωυσῆς ἐπεϰάλυπτε τὸ τοιοῦτον [146b]εἰδὼς οὐδὲ τὴν τῶν διαλέϰτων σύγχυσιν ἀνατέϑειϰε τῷ ϑεῷ μόνῳ. φησὶ γὰϱ αὐτὸν οὐ μόνον ϰατελϑεῖν οὐ μὴν οὐδὲ ἕνα συγϰατελϑεῖν αὐτῷ, πλείονας δέ, ϰαὶ τούτους οἵτινές εἰσιν οὐϰ εἶπεν: εὔδηλον δέ, ὅτι παϱαπλησίους αὐτῷ τοὺς συγϰατιόντας ὑπελάμβανεν. εἰ τοίνυν πϱὸς τὴν σύγχυσιν τῶν διαλέϰτων οὐχ ὁ ϰύϱιος μόνος, ἀλλὰ ϰαὶ οἱ σὺν αὐτῷ ϰατέϱχονται, πϱόδηλον, ὅτι ϰαὶ πϱὸς τὴν σύγχυσιν τῶν ἠϑῶν οὐχ ὁ ϰύϱιος μόνος, ἀλλὰ ϰαὶ οἱ σὺν αὐτῷ τὰς διαλέϰτους συγχέοντες εἰϰότως ἂν ὑπολαμβάνοιντο ταύτης εἶναι τῆς διαστάσεως αἴτιοι. [148b]Τί οὖν, οὐϰ ἐν μαϰϱοῖς εἰπεῖν βουλόμενος, τοσαῦτα ἐπεξῆλϑον ; ὡς, εἰ μὲν ὁ πϱοσεχὴς εἴη τοῦ ϰόσμου δημιουϱγὸς ὁ ὑπὸ τοῦ Μωυσέως ϰηϱυττόμενος, ἡμεῖς ὑπὲϱ αὐτοῦ βελτίους ἔχομεν δόξας οἱ ϰοινὸν μὲν ἐϰεῖνον ὑπολαμβάνοντες ἁπάντων δεσπότην, ἐϑνάϱχας δὲ ἄλλους, οἳ τυγχάνουσι μὲν ὑπ̓ ἐϰεῖνον, εἰσὶ δὲ ὥσπεϱ ὕπαϱχοι βασιλέως, ἕϰαστος τὴν ἑαυτοῦ διαφεϱόντως ἐπανοϱϑούμενος [148c]φϱοντίδα: ϰαὶ οὐ ϰαϑίσταμεν αὐτὸν οὐδὲ ἀντιμεϱίτην τῶν ὑπ̓ αὐτὸν ϑεῶν ϰαϑισταμένων. εἰ δὲ μεϱιϰόν τινα τιμήσας ἐϰεῖνος ἀντιτίϑησιν αὐτῷ τὴν τοῦ παντὸς ἡγεμονίαν, ἄμεινον τὸν τῶν ὅλων ϑεὸν ἡμῖν πειϑομένους ἐπιγνῶναι μετὰ τοῦ μηδὲ ἐϰεῖνον ἀγνοῆσαι, ἢ τὸν τοῦ ἐλαχίστου μέϱους εἰληχότα τὴν ἡγεμονίαν ἀντὶ τοῦ πάντων τιμᾶν δημιουϱγοῦ. [152b]Ὁ νόμος ἐστὶν ὁ τοῦ Μωυσέως ϑαυμαστός, ἡ δεϰάλογος ἐϰείνη: „Οὐ ϰλέψεις, οὐ φονεύσεις, οὐ ψευδομαϱτυϱήσεις.“ γεγϱάφϑω δὲ αὐτοῖς τοῖς [152c]ῥήμασιν ἑϰάστη τῶν ἐντολῶν, ἃς ὑπ̓ αὐτοῦ φησι γεγϱάφϑαι τοῦ ϑεοῦ. „Ἐγὼ εἰμι ϰύϱιος ὁ ϑεός σου, ὃς ἐξήγαγέ σε ἐϰ γῆς Αἰγύπτου.“ δευτέϱα μετὰ τοῦτο: „Οὐϰ ἔσονταί σοι ϑεοὶ ἕτεϱοι πλὴν ἐμοῦ. οὐ ποιήσεις σεαυτῷ εἴδωλον.“ ϰαὶ τὴν αἰτίαν πϱοστίϑησιν: „Ἐγὼ γάϱ εἰμι ϰύϱιος ὁ ϑεός σου, ϑεὸς ζηλωτής, ἀποδιδοὺς πατέϱων ἁμαϱτίας ἐπὶ τέϰνα ἕως τϱίτης γενεᾶς.“ „Οὐ λήψῃ τὸ ὄνομα ϰυϱίου τοῦ ϑεοῦ σου ἐπὶ ματαίῳ.“ „Μνήσϑητι τὴν ἡμέϱαν τῶν σαββάτων.“ „Τίμα σου τὸν πατέϱα ϰαὶ τὴν μητέϱα.“ „Οὐ μοιχεύσεις.“ „Οὐ φονεύσεις.“ „Οὐ“ [152d]„ϰλέψεις.“ „Οὐ ψευδομαϱτυϱήσεις.“ „Οὐϰ ἐπιϑυμήσεις τὰ τοῦ πλησίον σου.“ Ποῖον ἔϑνος ἐστί, πϱὸς τῶν ϑεῶν, ἔξω τοῦ „Οὐ πϱοσϰυνήσεις ϑεοῖς ἑτέϱοις“ ϰαὶ τοῦ „Μνήσϑητι τῆς ἡμέϱας τῶν σαββάτων,“ ὃ μὴ τὰς ἄλλας οἴεται χϱῆναι φυλάττειν ἐντολάς, ὡς ϰαὶ τιμωϱίας ϰεῖσϑαι τοῖς παϱαβαίνουσιν, ἐνιαχοῦ μὲν σφοδϱοτέϱας, ἐνιαχοῦ δὲ παϱαπλησίας ταῖς παϱὰ Μωυσέως νομοϑετείσαις, ἔστι δὲ ὅπου ϰαὶ φιλανϑϱωποτέϱας; [155c]Ἀλλὰ τὸ „Οὐ πϱοσϰυνήσεις ϑεοῖς ἑτέϱοις’— ὃ δὴ μετὰ μεγάλης πεϱὶ τὸν ϑεόν φησι διαβολῆς. „Θεὸς γὰϱ ζηλωτής“ φησι: ϰαὶ ἐν ἄλλοις πάλιν: [155d]Ὁ ϑεὸς ἡμῶν πῦϱ ϰαταναλίσϰον.“ εἶτα ἄνϑϱωπος ζηλωτὴς ϰαὶ βάσϰανος ἄξιος εἶναί σοι φαίνεται  μέμψεως, ἐϰϑειάζεις δέ, εἰ ζηλότυπος ὁ ϑεὸς λέγεται; ϰαίτοι πῶς εὔλογον οὕτω φανεϱὸν πϱᾶγμα τοῦ ϑεοῦ ϰαταψεύδεσϑαι; ϰαὶ γὰϱ εἰ ζηλότυπος, ἄϰοντος αὐτοῦ πάντες οἱ ϑεοὶ πϱοσϰυνοῦνται ϰαὶ πάντα τὰ λοιπὰ τῶν ἐϑνῶν τοὺς ϑεοὺς πϱοσϰυνεῖ. εἶτα πῶς οὐϰ ἀνέστειλεν αὐτὸς ζηλῶν οὕτω ϰαὶ μὴ βουλόμενος πϱοσϰυνεῖσϑαι τοὺς ἄλλους, ἀλλὰ μόνον ἑαυτόν; ἆῤ οὖν οὐχ οἷός τε ἦν ἢ οὐδὲ τὴν [155e]ἀϱχὴν ἠβουλήϑη ϰωλῦσαι μὴ πϱοσϰυνεῖσϑαι ϰαὶ τοὺς ἄλλους ϑεούς; ἀλλὰ τὸ μὲν πϱῶτον ἀσεβές, τὸ δὴ λέγειν ὡς οὐϰ ἠδύνατο: τὸ δεύτεϱον δὲ τοῖς ἡμετέϱοις ἔϱγοις ὁμολογεῖ. ἄφετε τοῦτον τὸν λῆϱον ϰαὶ μὴ τηλιϰαύτην ἐφ̓ ὑμᾶς αὐτοὺς ἕλϰετε [159e]βλασφημίαν. εἰ γὰϱ οὐδένα ϑέλει πϱοσϰυνεῖσϑαι, τοῦ χάϱιν αὐτοῦ τὸν νόϑον υἱὸν τοῦτον πϱοσϰυνεῖτε ϰαὶ ὃν ἐϰεῖνος ἴδιον οὔτε ἐνόμισεν οὐϑ̓ ἡγήσατο πώποτε. ϰαὶ δείξω γε τοῦτο ῥᾳδίως. ὑμεῖς δέ, οὐϰ οἶδ̓ ὅϑεν, ὑπόβλητον αὐτῷ πϱοστίϑετε ... [160d]Οὐδαμοῦ χαλεπαίνων ὁ ϑεὸς φαίνεται οὐδὲ ἀγαναϰτῶν οὐδὲ ὀϱγιζόμενος οὐδὲ ὀμνύων οὐδ̓ ἐπ̓ ἀμφότεϱα ταχέως ῥέπων οὐδὲ στϱεπτός, ὡς ὁ Μωυσῆς φησιν ἐπὶ τοῦ Φινεές. εἴ τις ὑμῶν ἀνέγνω τοὺς ἀϱιϑμούς, οἶδεν ὃ λέγω. ἐπειδὴ γὰϱ Φινεὲς τὸν τελεσϑέντα τῷ Βεελφεγὼϱ μετὰ τῆς ἀναπεισάσης αὐτὸν γυναιϰὸς αὐτοχειϱίᾳ λαβὼν ἀπέϰτεινεν αἰσχϱῷ ϰαὶ ὀδυνηϱοτάτῳ τϱαύματι, διὰ τῆς μήτϱας, [160e]φησί, παίσας τὴν γυναῖϰα, πεποίηται λέγων ὁ ϑεός: „Φινεὲς υἱὸς Ἐλεάζαϱ υἱοῦ Ἀαϱὼν τοῦ ἱεϱέως ϰατέπαυσε τὸν ϑυμόν μου ἀπὸ υἱῶν Ἰσϱαὴλ ἐν τῷ ζηλῶσαί μου τὸν ζῆλον ἐν αὐτοῖς. ϰαὶ οὐϰ ἐξανήλωσα τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἰσϱαὴλ ἐν τῷ ζήλῳ μου.“ τί ϰουφότεϱον τῆς αἰτίας, δἰ ἣν ϑεὸς ὀϱγισϑεὶς οὐϰ ἀληϑῶς ὑπὸ τοῦ γϱάψαντος ταῦτα [161a]πεποίηται; τί δὲ ἀλογώτεϱον, εἰ δέϰα ἢ πεντεϰαίδεϰα, ϰείσϑω δὲ ϰαὶ ἑϰατόν, οὐ γὰϱ δὴ χιλίους ἐϱοῦσι—ϑῶμεν δὲ ἡμεῖς ϰαὶ τοσούτους τολμήσαντάς τι τῶν ὑπὸ τοῦ ϑεοῦ τεταγμένων νόμων παϱαβῆναι: ἑξαϰοσίας ἐχϱῆν διὰ τοὺς ἅπαξ χιλίους ἀναλωϑῆναι χιλιάδας; ὡς ἔμοιγε ϰϱεῖττον εἶναι τῷ παντὶ φαίνεται χιλίοις ἀνδϱάσι βελτίστοις ἕνα συνδιασῶσαι πονηϱὸν ἢ συνδιαφϑεῖϱαι τοὺς χιλίους ἑνί.... Εἰ γὰϱ ϰαὶ ἑνὸς ἡϱώων ϰαὶ οὐϰ ἐπισήμου δαίμονος δύσοιστος ἡ ὀϱγὴ χώϱαις τε ϰαὶ πόλεσιν ὁλοϰλήϱοις, τίς ἂν ὑπέστη τοσούτου ϑεοῦ δαίμοσιν [168b]ἢ ἀγγέλοις ἢ ϰαὶ ἀνϑϱώποις ἐπιμηνίσαντος; ἄξιόν γέ ἐστι παϱαβαλεῖν αὐτὸν τῇ Λυϰούϱγου πϱαότητι [168c]ϰαὶ τῇ Σόλωνος ἀνεξιϰαϰίᾳ ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων πϱὸς [171d]τοὺς ἠδιϰηϰότας ἐπιειϰείᾳ ϰαὶ χϱηστότητι. πόσῳ δὲ δὴ τὰ παῤ ἡμῖν τῶν παῤ αὐτοῖς ϰϱείττονα, ϰαὶ ἐϰ τῶνδε σϰοπεῖτε. μιμεῖσϑαι ϰελεύουσιν ἡμᾶς οἱ φιλόσοφοι ϰατὰ δύναμιν τοὺς ϑεούς, εἶναι δὲ ταύτην τὴν μίμησιν ἐν ϑεωϱίᾳ τῶν ὄντων. ὅτι [171e]δὲ τοῦτο δίχα πάϑους ἐστὶ ϰαὶ ἐν ἀπαϑείᾳ ϰεῖται, πϱόδηλόν ἐστί που, ϰἂν ἐγὼ μὴ λέγω: ϰαϑ̓ ὅσον ἄϱα ἐν ἀπαϑείᾳ γινόμεϑα, τεταγμένοι πεϱὶ τῶν ὄντων τὴν ϑεωϱίαν, ϰατὰ τοσοῦτον ἐξομοιούμεϑα τῷ ϑεῷ. τίς δὲ ἡ παῤ Ἑβϱαίοις ὑμνουμένη τοῦ ϑεοῦ μίμησις; ὀϱγὴ ϰαὶ ϑυμὸς ϰαὶ ζῆλος ἄγϱιος. „Φινεὲς“ γάϱ φησι „ϰατέπαυσε τὸν ϑυμόν μου ἀπὸ υἱῶν Ἰσϱαὴλ ἐν τῷ ζηλῶσαι τὸν ζῆλόν μοῦ ἐν αὐτοῖς.“ εὑϱὼν γὰϱ ὁ ϑεὸς τὸν συναγαναϰτοῦντα ϰαὶ συναλγοῦντα ἀφεὶς τὴν ἀγανάϰτησιν [172a]φαίνεται. ταῦτα ϰαὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα πεϱὶ ϑεοῦ ἕτεϱα πεποίηται λέγων ὁ Μωυσῆς οὐϰ ὀλιγαχοῦ τῆς γϱαφῆς. [176a]Ὅτι δὲ οὐχ Ἑβϱαίων μόνον ἐμέλησε τῷ ϑεῷ, 100 πάντων δὲ ἐϑνῶν ϰηδόμενος ἔδωϰεν ἐϰείνοις μὲν οὐδὲν σπουδαῖον ἢ μέγα, ἡμῖν δὲ μαϰϱῷ ϰϱείττονα ϰαὶ διαφέϱοντα, σϰοπεῖτε λοιπὸν τὸ ἐντεῦϑεν. ἔχουσι μὲν εἰπεῖν ϰαὶ Αἰγύπτιοι, παῤ ἑαυτοῖς ἀπαϱιϑμούμενοι σοφῶν οὐϰ ὀλίγων ὀνόματα, πολλοὺς ἐσχηϰέναι τοὺς ἀπὸ τῆς Ἑϱμοῦ διαδοχῆς, Ἑϱμοῦ δέ φημι τοῦ τϱίτου ἐπιφοιτήσαντος τῇ Αἰγύπτῳ, Χαλδαῖοι δὲ ϰαὶ Ἀσσύϱιοι τοὺς ἀπ̓ Ὠάννου ϰαὶ Βήλου, μυϱίους δὲ Ἕλληνες τοὺς ἀπὸ [176c]Χείϱωνος. ἐϰ τούτου γὰϱ πάντες ἐγένοντο τελεστιϰοὶ φύσει ϰαὶ ϑεολογιϰοί, ϰαϑὸ δὴ δοϰοῦσι μόνον Ἑβϱαῖοι τὰ ἑαυτῶν ἀποσεμνύνειν... [178a]Ἀλλ̓ ἀϱχὴν ἔδωϰεν ὑμῖν ἐπιστήμης ἢ μάϑημα φιλόσοφον; ϰαὶ ποῖον; ἡ μὲν γὰϱ πεϱὶ τὰ φαινόμενα [178b]ϑεωϱία παϱὰ τοῖς Ἕλλησιν ἐτελειώϑη, τῶν πϱώτων τηϱήσεων παϱὰ τοῖς βαϱβάϱοις ἐν Βαβυλῶνι γενομένων: ἡ δὲ πεϱὶ τὴν γεωμετϱίαν ἀπὸ τῆς γεωδαισίας τῆς ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ τὴν ἀϱχὴν λαβοῦσα πϱὸς τοσοῦτον μέγεϑος ηὐξήϑη: τὸ δὲ πεϱὶ τοὺς ἀϱιϑμοὺς ἀπὸ τῶν Φοινίϰων ἐμπόϱων ἀϱξάμενον τέως εἰς ἐπιστήμης παϱὰ τοῖς Ἕλλησι ϰατέστη πϱόσχημα. ταῦτα δὴ τϱία μετὰ τῆς συναϱίϑμου μουσιϰῆς Ἕλληνες εἰς ἓν συνῆψαν, ἀστϱονομίαν γεωμετϱίᾳ πϱοσυφήναντες, ἀμφοῖν δὲ πϱοσαϱμόσαντες τοὺς ἀϱιϑμοὺς ϰαὶ τὸ ἐν τούτοις ἐναϱμόνιον ϰατανοήσαντες. ἐντεῦϑεν ἔϑεντο τῇ παϱὰ σφίσι μουσιϰῇ τοὺς ὅϱους, εὑϱόντες τῶν ἁϱμονιϰῶν λόγων πϱὸς τὴν αἴσϑησιν τῆς ἀϰοῆς ἄπταιστον ὁμολογίαν ἢ ὅτι τούτου μάλιστα ἐγγύς. [184b]Πότεϱον οὖν χϱή με ϰατ̓ ἄνδϱα ὀνομάζειν ἢ ϰατ̓ ἐπιτηδεύματα; ἢ τοὺς ἀνϑϱώπους, οἷον Πλάτωνα, Σωϰϱάτην, Ἀϱιστείδην, Κίμωνα, Θαλῆν, Λυϰοῦϱγον, Ἀγησίλαον, Ἀϱχίδαμον—ἢ μᾶλλον τὸ τῶν φιλοσόφων γένος, τὸ τῶν στϱατηγῶν, τὸ τῶν δημιουϱγῶν, τὸ τῶν νομοϑετῶν; εὑϱεϑήσονται γὰϱ οἱ μοχϑηϱότατοι ϰαὶ βδελυϱώτατοι τῶν στϱατηγῶν [184c]ἐπιειϰέστεϱον χϱησάμενοι τοῖς ἡδιϰηϰόσι τὰ μέγιστα ἢ Μωυσῆς τοῖς οὐδὲν ἐξημαϱτηϰόσιν. [190c]τίνα οὖν ὑμῖν ἀπαγγείλω βασιλείαν; πότεϱα τὴν Πεϱσέως ἢ τὴν Αἰαϰοῦ ἢ Μίνω τοῦ Κϱητός, ὃς ἐϰάϑηϱε μὲν λῃστευομένην τὴν ϑάλασσαν, ἐϰβαλὼν ϰαὶ ἐξελάσας τοὺς βαϱβάϱους ἄχϱι Συϱίας ϰαὶ Σιϰελίας, ἐφ̓ ἑϰάτεϱα πϱοβὰς τοῖς τῆς ἀϱχῆς ὁϱίοις, οὐ μόνων δὲ τῶν νήσων, ἀλλὰ ϰαὶ τῶν παϱαλίων ἐϰϱάτει; ϰαὶ διελόμενος πϱὸς τὸν ἀδελφὸν Ῥαδάμανϑυν, οὔτι τὴν γῆν, ἀλλὰ τὴν ἐπιμέλειαν τῶν ἀνϑϱώπων, αὐτὸς μὲν ἐτίϑει παϱὰ τοῦ Διὸς λαμβάνων τοὺς νόμους, ἐϰείνῳ δὲ τὸ διϰαστιϰὸν ἠφίει μέϱος ἀναπληϱοῦν... [193c]Ἀλλ̓ ἐπειδὴ ϰτισϑεῖσαν αὐτὴν πολλοὶ μὲν πεϱιέστησαν πόλεμοι, πάντων δὲ ἐϰϱάτει ϰαὶ ϰατηγωνίζετο ϰαί, παῤ αὐτὰ μᾶλλον αὐξανομένη τὰ δεινά, τῆς ἀσφαλείας ἐδεῖτο μείζονος, αὖϑις ὁ Ζεὺς τὸν φιλοσοφώτατον αὐτῇ Νουμᾶν ἐφίστησιν. οὗτος ἦν ὁ ϰαλὸς ϰαὶ ἀγαϑὸς ὁ [193d]Νουμᾶς, ἄλσεσιν ἐϱήμοις ἐνδιατϱίβων ϰαὶ συνὼν ἀεὶ τοῖς ϑεοῖς ϰατὰ τὰς ἀϰϱαιφνεῖς αὐτοῦ νοήσεις... οὗτος τοὺς πλείστους τῶν ἱεϱατιϰῶν [194b]ϰατέστησε νόμους. ταῦτα μὲν οὖν ἐϰ ϰατοχῆς ϰαὶ ἐπιπνοίας ϑείας ἔϰ τε τῶν τῆς Σιβύλλης ϰαὶ τῶν ἄλλων, οἳ δὴ γεγόνασι ϰατ̓ ἐϰεῖνον τὸν χϱόνον ϰατὰ τὴν πάτϱιον φωνὴν χϱης μολόγοι, φαίνεται δοὺς ὁ Ζεὺς τῇ πόλει. τὴν δὲ ἐξ ἀέϱος πεσοῦσαν ἀσπίδα ϰαὶ τὴν ἐν τῷ λόφῳ ϰεφαλὴν [194c]φανεῖσαν, ὅϑεν, οἶμαι, ϰαὶ τοὔνομα πϱοσέλαβεν ἡ τοῦ μεγάλου Διὸς ἕδϱα, πότεϱον ἐν τοῖς πϱώτοις ἢ τοῖς δευτέϱοις ἀϱιϑμήσωμεν τῶν δώϱων; εἶτα, ὦ δυστυχεῖς ἄνϑϱωποι, σωζομένου τοῦ παῤ ἡμῖν ὅπλου διοπετοῦς, ὃ ϰατέπεμψεν ὁ μέγας Ζεὺς ἤτοι πατὴϱ Ἄϱης, ἐνέχυϱον διδοὺς οὐ λόγον, ἔϱγον δέ, ὅτι τῆς πόλεως ἡμῶν εἰς τὸ διηνεϰὲς πϱοασπίσει, πϱοσϰυνεῖν ἀφέντες ϰαὶ σέβεσϑαι, τὸ τοῦ σταυϱοῦ πϱοσϰυνεῖτε ξύλον, εἰϰόνας αὐτοῦ σϰιαγϱαφοῦντες ἐν [194d]τῷ μετώπῳ ϰαὶ πϱὸ τῶν οἰϰημάτων ἐγγϱάφοντες. Ἆϱα ἀξίως ἄν τις τοὺς συνετωτέϱους ὑμῶν μισήσειεν ἢ τοὺς ἀφϱονεστέϱους ἐλεήσειεν, οἳ ϰαταϰολουϑοῦντες ὑμῖν, εἰς τοσοῦτον ἦλϑον ὀλέϑϱου, ὥστε τοὺς αἰωνίους ἀφέντες ϑεοὺς ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰουδαίων [197c]μεταβῆναι νεϰϱόν;... παϱίημι γὰϱ τὰ τῆς μητϱὸς τῶν ϑεῶν μυστήϱια ϰαὶ ζηλῶ τὸν Μάϱιον. [198b]...τὸ γὰϱ ἐϰ ϑεῶν εἰς ἀνϑϱώπους ἀφιϰνούνενον πνεῦμα σπανιάϰις μὲν ϰαὶ ἐν ὀλίγοις γίνεται ϰαὶ οὔτε πάντα ἄνδϱα τούτου μετασχεῖν ῥᾴδιον οὔτε ἐν παντὶ ϰαιϱῷ. ταύτῃ τοι ϰαὶ τὸ παῤ Ἑβϱαίοις πϱοφητιϰὸν πνεῦμα ἐπέλιπεν, οὐϰοῦν οὐδὲ παῤ Αἰγυπτίοις εἰς τοῦτο σώζεται. φαίνεται δὲ ϰαὶ τὰ αὐτοφυῆ χϱηστήϱια σιγῆσαι ταῖς τῶν χϱόνων εἴϰοντα πεϱιόδοις. ὃ δὴ φιλάνϑϱωπος ἡμῶν δεσπότης ϰαὶ πατὴϱ Ζεὺς ἐννοήσας, ὡς ἂν μὴ παντάπασι τῆς πϱὸς τοὺς ϑεοὺς ἀποστεϱηϑῶμεν ϰοινωνίας, δέδωϰεν ἡμῖν διὰ τῶν ἱεϱῶν τεχνῶν [198d]ἐπίσϰεψιν, ὑφ̓ ἧς πϱὸς τὰς χϱείας ἕξομεν τὴν ἀποχϱῶσαν βοήϑειαν. [200a]Ἔλαϑέ με μιϰϱοῦ τὸ μέγιστον τῶν Ἡλίου ϰαὶ Διὸς δώϱων. εἰϰότως δὲ αὐτὸ ἐφύλαξα ἐν τῷ τέλει. ϰαὶ γὰϱ οὐϰ ἴδιόν ἐστιν ἡμῶν μόνον, ἀλλ̓, οἶμαι, ϰοινὸν πϱὸς Ἕλληνας, τοὺς ἡμετέϱους συγγενεῖς. ὁ γάϱ τοι Ζεὺς ἐν μὲν τοῖς νοητοῖς ἐξ ἑαυτοῦ τὸν Ἀσϰληπιὸν ἐγέννησεν, εἰς δὲ τὴν γῆν διὰ τῆς Ἡλίου γονίμου ζωῆς ἐξέφηνεν. οὗτος ἐπὶ γῆς ἐξ οὐϱανοῦ ποιησάμενος τὴν πϱόοδον, ἑνοειδῶς μὲν ἐν ἀνϑϱώπου μοϱφῇ πεϱὶ τὴν Ἐπίδαυϱον [200b]ἀνεφάνη, πληϑυνόμενος δὲ ἐντεῦϑεν ταῖς πϱοόδοις ἐπὶ πᾶσαν ὤϱεξε τὴν γῆν τὴν σωτήϱιον ἑαυτοῦ δεξιάν. ἦλϑεν εἰς Πέϱγαμον, εἰς Ἰωνίαν, εἰς Τάϱαντα μετὰ ταῦϑ̓, ὕστεϱον ἦλϑεν εἰς τὴν Ῥώμην. ᾤχετο δὲ εἰς Κῶ, ἐνϑένδε εἰς Αἰγάς. εἶτα πανταχοῦ γῆς ἐστι ϰαὶ ϑαλάσσης. οὐ ϰαϑ̓ ἕϰαστον ἡμῶν ἐπιφοιτᾷ, ϰαὶ ὅμως ἐπανοϱϑοῦται ψυχὰς πλημμελῶς διαϰειμένας ϰαὶ τὰ σώματα ἀσϑενῶς ἔχοντα. [201e]Τί δὲ τοιοῦτον ἑαυτοῖς Ἑβϱαῖοι ϰαυχῶνται παϱὰ τοῦ ϑεοῦ δεδόσϑαι, πϱὸς οὓς ὑμεῖς ἀφ̓ ἡμῶν αὐτομολήσαντες πείϑεσϑε; εἰ τοῖς ἐϰείνων γοῦν πϱοσείχετε λόγοις, οὐϰ ἂν παντάπασιν ἐπεπϱάγειτε δυστυχῶς, ἀλλὰ χεῖϱον μὲν ἢ πϱότεϱον, ὁπότε σὺν ἡμῖν ἦτε, οἰστὰ δὲ ὅμως ἐπεπόνϑειτε ἂν ϰαὶ φοϱητά. ἕνα γὰϱ ἀντὶ πολλῶν ϑεὸν ἐσέβεσϑε ἂν οὐϰ ἄνϑϱωπον, μᾶλλον δὲ πολλοὺς ἀνϑϱώπους [202a]δυστυχεῖς. ϰαὶ νόμῳ σϰληϱῷ μὲν ϰαὶ τϱαχεῖ ϰαὶ πολὺ τὸ ἄγϱιον ἔχοντι ϰαὶ βάϱβαϱον ἀντὶ τῶν παῤ ἡμῖν ἐπιειϰῶν ϰαὶ φιλανϑϱώπων χϱώμενοι τὰ μὲν ἄλλα χείϱονες ἂν ἦτε, ἁγνότεϱοι δὲ ϰαὶ ϰαϑαϱώτεϱοι τὰς ἁγιστείας. νῦν δὲ ὑμῖν συμβέβηϰεν ὥσπεϱ ταῖς βδέλλαις τὸ χείϱιστον ἕλϰειν αἷμα ἐϰεῖϑεν, ἀφεῖναι δὲ τὸ ϰαϑαϱώτεϱον. [191d]ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς ἀναπείσας τὸ χείϱιστον τῶν παῤ [191e]ὑμῖν, ὀλίγους πϱὸς τοῖς τϱιαϰοσίοις ἐνιαυτοῖς ὀνομάζεται, ἐϱγασάμενος παῤ ὃν ἔζη χϱόνον οὐδὲν ἀϰοῆς ἄξιον, εἰ μή τις οἴεται τοὺς ϰυλλοὺς ϰαὶ τυφλοὺς ἰάσασϑαι ϰαὶ δαιμονῶντας ἐξοϱϰίζειν ἐν Βηϑσαιδᾷ ϰαὶ ἐν Βηϑανίᾳ ταῖς ϰώμαις τῶν μεγίστων [205e]ἔϱγων εἶναι. ἁγνείας μὲν οὐδὲ γὰϱ εἰ πεποίηται μνήμην ἐπίστασϑε: ζηλοῦτε δὲ Ἰουδαίων τοὺς ϑυμοὺς ϰαὶ τὴν πιϰϱίαν, ἀνατϱέποντες ἱεϱὰ ϰαὶ [206a]βωμοὺς ϰαὶ ἀπεσφάξατε οὐχ ἡμῶν μόνον τοὺς τοῖς πατϱῴοις ἐμμένοντας, ἀλλὰ ϰαὶ τῶν ἐξ ἴσης ὑμῶν πεπλανημένων αἱϱετιϰοὺς τοὺς μὴ τὸν αὐτὸν τϱόπον ὑμῶν τὸν νεϰϱὸν ϑϱηνοῦντας. ἀλλὰ ταῦτα ὑμέτεϱα μᾶλλόν ἐστιν: οὐδαμοῦ γὰϱ οὔτε Ἰησοῦς αὐτὰ παϱαδέδωϰε ϰελεύων ὑμῖν οὔτε Παῦλος. αἴτιον δέ, ὅτι μηδὲ ἤλπισαν εἰς τοῦτο ἀφίξεσϑαί ποτε δυνάμεως ὑμᾶς: ἠγάπων γάϱ, εἰ ϑεϱαπαίνας ἐξαπατήσουσι ϰαὶ δούλους ϰαὶ διὰ τούτων τὰς γυναῖϰας ἄνδϱας τε, οἵους Κοϱνήλιος ϰαὶ Σέϱγιος. [206b]ὧν εἷς ἐὰν φανῇ τῶν τηνιϰαῦτα γνωϱιζομένων ἐπιμνηϑεὶς—ἐπὶ Τιβεϱίου γὰϱ ἤτοι Κλαυδίου ταῦτα ἐγίνετο—, πεϱὶ πάντων ὅτι ψεύδομαι νομίζετε. [209d]Ἀλλὰ τοῦτο μὲν οὐϰ οἶδ̓ ὅϑεν ὥσπεϱ ἐπιπνεόμενος ἐφϑεγξάμην, ὅϑεν δὲ ἐξέβην, ὅτι „Πϱὸς τοὺς Ἰουδαίους ηὐτομολήσατε, τί τοῖς ἡμετέϱοις ἀχαϱιστήσαντες ϑεοῖς;“ ἆῤ ὅτι βασιλεύειν ἔδοσαν οἱ ϑεοὶ τῇ Ῥώμῃ, τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις ὀλίγον μὲν χϱόνον ἐλευϑέϱους εἶναι, δουλεῦσαι δὲ ἀεὶ ϰαὶ παϱοιϰῆσαι; σϰόπει τὸν Ἁβϱαάμ: οὐχὶ πάϱοιϰος ἦν ἐν ἀλλοτϱίᾳ; [209e]τὸν Ἰαϰώβ: οὐ πϱότεϱον μὲν Σύϱοις, ἑξῆς δὲ ἐπὶ τούτοις Παλαιστινοῖς, ἐν γήϱᾳ δὲ Αἰγυπτίοις ἐδούλευσεν; οὐϰ ἐξ οἴϰου δουλείας ἐξαγαγεῖν αὐτοὺς ὁ Μωυσῆς φησιν ἐξ Αἰγύπτου ἐν βϱαχίονι ὑψηλῷ; ϰατοιϰήσαντες δὲ τὴν Παλαιστίνην, οὐ πυϰνότεϱον ἤμειψαν τὰς τύχας ἢ τὸ χϱῶμά φασιν οἱ τεϑεαμένοι τὸν χαμαιλέοντα. νῦν μὲν ὑπαϰούοντες τοῖς ϰϱιταῖς, νῦν δὲ τοῖς ἀλλοφύλοις δουλεύοντες; ἐπειδὴ δὲ ἐβασιλεύϑησαν— ἀφείσϑω δὲ νῦν ὅπως: οὔτε γὰϱ ὁ ϑεὸς ἑϰὼν αὐτοῖς τὸ βασιλεύεσϑαι συνεχώϱησεν, ὡς ἡ γϱαφή φησιν, [210a]ἀλλὰ βιασϑεὶς ὑπ̓ αὐτῶν ϰαὶ πϱοδιαστειλάμενος, ὅτι ἄϱα φαύλως βασιλευϑήσονται. πλὴν ἀλλ̓ ᾤϰησαν γοῦν τὴν ἑαυτῶν ϰαὶ ἐγεώϱγησαν ὀλίγα πϱὸς τοῖς τϱιαϰοσίοις ἔτεσιν. ἐξ ἐϰείνου πϱῶτον Ἀσσυϱίοις, εἶτα Μήδοις, ὕστεϱον Πέϱσαις ἐδούλευσαν, [213a]εἶτα νῦν ἡμῖν αὐτοῖς. ϰαὶ ὁ παῤ ὑμῖν ϰηϱυττόμενος Ἰησοῦς εἷς ἦν τῶν Καίσαϱος ὑπηϰόων. εἰ δὲ ἀπιστεῖτε, μιϰϱὸν ὕστεϱον ἀποδείξω: μᾶλλον δὲ ἤδη λεγέσϑω. φατὲ μέντοι μετὰ τοῦ πατϱὸς αὐτὸν ἀπογϱάψασϑαι ϰαὶ τῆς μητϱὸς ἐπὶ Κυϱηνίου. [213b]Ἀλλὰ γενόμενος ἄνϑϱωπος τίνων ἀγαϑῶν αἴτιος ϰατέστη τοῖς ἑαυτοῦ συγγενέσιν; οὐ γὰϱ ἠϑέλησαν, φασίν, ὑπαϰοῦσαι τοῦ Ἰησοῦ. τί δέ; ὁ σϰληϱοϰάϱδιος ϰαὶ λιϑοτϱάχηλος ἐϰεῖνος λαὸς πῶς ὑπήϰουσε τοῦ Μωυσέως: Ἰησοῦς δέ, ὁ τοῖς πνεύμασιν ἐπιτάττων ϰαὶ βαδίζων ἐπὶ τῆς ϑαλάσσης ϰαὶ τὰ δαιμόνια ἐξελαύνων, ὡς δὲ ὑμεῖς λέγετε, τὸν οὐϱανὸν ϰαὶ τὴν γῆν ἀπεϱγασάμενος—οὐ γὰϱ δὴ ταῦτα τετόλμηϰέ τις εἰπεῖν πεϱὶ αὐτοῦ τῶν [213c]μαϑητῶν, εἰ μὴ μόνος Ἰωάννης οὐδὲ αὐτὸς σαφῶς οὐδὲ τϱανῶς: ἀλλ̓ εἰϱηϰέναι γε συγϰεχωϱήσϑω— οὐϰ ἠδύνατο τὰς πϱοαιϱέσεις ἐπὶ σωτηϱίᾳ τῶν ἑαυτοῦ φίλων ϰαὶ συγγενῶν μεταστῆσαι; [218a]Ταῦτα μὲν οὖν ϰαὶ μιϰϱὸν ὕστεϱον, ὅταν ἰδίᾳ πεϱὶ τῆς τῶν εὐαγγελίων τεϱατουϱγίας ϰαὶ σϰευωϱίας ἐξετάζειν ἀϱξώμεϑα. νυνὶ δὲ ἀποϰϱίνεσϑέ μοι πϱὸς ἐϰεῖνο. πότεϱον ἄμεινον τὸ διηνεϰῶς μὲν [218b]ἐλεύϑεϱον εἶναι, ἐν δισχιλίοις δὲ ὅλοις ἐνιαυτοῖς ἄϱξαι τὸ πλεῖον γῆς ϰαὶ ϑαλάσσης, ἢ τὸ δουλεύειν ϰαὶ πϱὸς ἐπίταγμα ζῆν ἀλλότϱιον; οὐδεὶς οὕτως ἐστὶν ἀναίσχυντος, ὡς ἑλέσϑαι μᾶλλον τὸ δεύτεϱον. ἀλλὰ τὸ πολέμῳ ϰϱατεῖν οἰήσεταί τις τοῦ ϰϱατεῖσϑαι χεῖϱον; οὕτω τίς ἐστιν ἀναίσϑητος; εἰ δὲ ταῦτα ἀληϑῆ φαμεν, ἕνα μοι ϰατὰ Ἀλέξανδϱον δείξατε στϱατηγόν, ἕνα ϰατὰ Καίσαϱα παϱὰ τοῖς Ἑβϱαίοις. οὐ γὰϱ δὴ παῤ ὑμῖν. ϰαίτοι, μὰ τοὺς ϑεούς, εὖ οἶδ̓ ὅτι πεϱιυβϱίζω τοὺς ἄνδϱας, ἐμνημόνευσα [218c]δὲ αὐτῶν ὡς γνωϱίμων. οἱ γὰϱ δὴ τούτων ἐλάττους ὑπὸ τῶν πολλῶν ἀγνοοῦνται, ὧν ἕϰαστος πάντων ὁμοῦ τῶν παῤ Ἑβϱαίοις γεγονότων ἐστὶ ϑαυμαστότεϱος. [221e]Ἀλλ̓ ὁ τῆς πολιτείας ϑεσμὸς ϰαὶ τύπος τῶν διϰαστηϱίων, ἡ δὲ πεϱὶ τὰς πόλεις οἰϰονομία ϰαὶ τῶν νόμων τὸ ϰάλλος, ἡ δὲ ἐν τοῖς μαϑήμασιν ἐπίδοσις, ἡ δὲ ἐν ταῖς ἐλευϑεϱίοις τέχναις ἄσϰησις [222a]οὐχ Ἑβϱαίων μὲν ἦν ἀϑλία ϰαὶ βαϱβαϱιϰή; ϰαίτοι βούλεται ὁ μοχϑηϱὸς Εὐσέβιος εἶναί τινα ϰαὶ παῤ αὐτοῖς ἑξάμετϱα, ϰαὶ φιλοτιμεῖται λογιϰὴν εἶναι πϱαγματείαν παϱὰ τοῖς Ἑβϱαίοις, ἧς τοὔνομα ἀϰήϰοε παϱὰ τοῖς Ἕλλησι. ποῖον ἰατϱιϰῆς εἶδος ἀνεφάνη παϱὰ τοῖς Ἑβϱαίοις, ὥσπεϱ ἐν Ἕλλησι τῆς Ἱπποϰϱάτους ϰαί τινων ἄλλων μετ̓ [224c]ἐϰεῖνον αἱϱέσεων; ὁ σοφώτατος Σολομῶν παϱόμοιός ἐστι τῷ παῤ Ἕλλησι Φωϰυλίδῃ Θεόγνιδι ἢ Ἰσοϰϱάτει; πόϑεν; εἰ γοῦν παϱαβάλοις τὰς Ἰσοϰϱάτους παϱαινέσεις ταῖς ἐϰείνου παϱοιμίαις, [224d]εὕϱοις ἄν, εὖ οἶδα, τὸν τοῦ Θεοδώϱου ϰϱείττονα τοῦ σοφωτάτου βασιλέως. ἀλλ̓ ἐϰεῖνος, φασί, ϰαὶ πεϱὶ ϑεουϱγίαν ἤσϰητο. τί οὖν ; οὐχὶ ϰαὶ ὁ Σολομῶν οὗτος τοῖς ἡμετέϱοις ἐλάτϱευσε ϑεοῖς, ὑπὸ τῆς γυναιϰός, ὡς λέγουσιν, ἐξαπατηϑείς ; ὢ μέγεϑος ἀϱετῆς. ὦ σοφίας πλοῦτος. οὐ πεϱιγέγονεν ἡδονῆς, ϰαὶ γυναιϰὸς λόγοι τοῦτον παϱήγαγον. εἴπεϱ οὖν ὑπὸ γυναιϰὸς ἠπατήϑη, τοῦτον σοφὸν μὴ λέγετε. εἰ δὲ πεπιστεύϰατε σοφόν, μή τοι παϱὰ γυναιϰὸς αὐτὸν ἐξηπατῆσϑαι νομίζετε, [224e]ϰϱίσει δὲ οἰϰείᾳ ϰαὶ συνέσει ϰαὶ τῇ παϱὰ τοῦ φανέντος αὐτῷ ϑεοῦ διδασϰαλίᾳ πειϑόμενον λελατϱευϰέναι ϰαὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις ϑεοῖς. φϑόνος γὰϱ ϰαὶ ζῆλος οὐδὲ ἄχϱι τῶν ἀϱίστων ἀνϑϱώπων ἀφιϰνεῖται, τοσοῦτον ἄπεστιν ἀγγέλων ϰαὶ ϑεῶν. ὑμεῖς δὲ ἄϱα πεϱὶ τὰ μέϱη τῶν δυνάμεων στϱέφεσϑε, ἃ δὴ δαιμόνιά τις εἰπὼν οὐϰ ἐξαμαϱτάνει. τὸ γὰϱ φιλότιμον ἐνταῦϑα ϰαὶ ϰενόδοξον, ἐν δὲ τοῖς ϑεοῖς οὐδὲν ὑπάϱχει ϰαὶ τοιοῦτον. [229c]Τοῦ χάϱιν ὑμεῖς τῶν παῤ Ἕλλησι παϱεσϑίετε μαϑημάτων, εἴπεϱ αὐτάϱϰης ὑμῖν ἐστιν ἡ τῶν ὑμετέϱων γϱαφῶν ἀνάγνωσις; ϰαίτοι ϰϱεῖττον ἐϰείνων εἴϱγειν τοὺς ἀνϑϱώπους ἢ τῆς τῶν ἱεϱοϑύτων ἐδωδῆς. ἐϰ μὲν γὰϱ ἐϰείνης, ϰαϑὰ ϰαὶ ὁ Παῦλος λέγει, βλάπτεται μὲν οὐδὲν ὁ πϱοσφεϱόμενος, ἡ δὲ συνείδησις τοῦ βλέποντος ἀδελφοῦ σϰανδαλισϑείη ἂν ϰαϑ̓ ὑμᾶς, ὦ σοφώτατοι ϰαὶ ὑπεϱήφανοι. διὰ δὲ τῶν μαϑημάτων τούτων ἀπέστη [229d]τῆς ἀϑεότητος πᾶν ὅτι πεϱ παῤ ὑμῖν ἡ φύσις ἤνεγϰε γενναῖον. ὅτῳ οὖν ὑπῆϱξεν εὐφυΐας ϰἂν μιϰϱὸν μόϱιον, τούτῳ τάχιστα συνέβη τῆς παῤ ὑμῖν ἀϑεότητος ἀποστῆναι. βέλτιον οὖν εἴϱγειν μαϑημάτων, οὐχ ἱεϱείων τοὺς ἀνϑϱώπους. ἀλλ̓ ἴστε ϰαὶ ὑμεῖς, ὡς ἐμοὶ φαίνεται, τὸ διάφοϱον εἰς σύνεσιν τῶν παῤ ὑμῖν γϱαφῶν πϱὸς τὰς ἡμετέϱας, ϰαὶ ὡς ἐϰ τῶν παῤ ὑμῖν οὐδεὶς ἂν γένοιτο γενναῖος ἀνήϱ, μᾶλλον δὲ οὐδὲ ἐπιειϰής, ἐϰ δὲ τῶν παῤ ἡμῖν αὐτὸς αὑτοῦ πᾶς ἂν γένοιτο ϰαλλίων, εἰ ϰαὶ [229e]παντάπασιν ἀφυής τις εἴη. φύσεως δὲ ἔχων εὖ ϰαὶ τὰς ἐϰ τούτων πϱοσλαχὼν παιδείας ἀτεχνῶς γίνεται τῶν ϑεῶν τοῖς ἀνϑϱώποις δῶϱον, ἤτοι φῶς ἀνάψας ἐπιστήμης ἢ πολιτείας γένος ὑφηγησάμενος ἢ πολεμίους πολλοὺς τϱεψάμενος ἢ ϰαὶ πολλὴν μὲν γῆν, πολλὴν δὲ ἐπελϑὼν ϑάλασσαν ϰαὶ τούτῳ φανεὶς ἡϱωιϰός... [141]Τεϰμήϱιον δὲ τοῦτο σαφές: ἐϰ πάντων ὑμῶν ἐπιλεξάμενοι παιδία ταῖς γϱαφαῖς ἐμμελετῆσαι [230a]παϱασϰευάσατε. ϰἂν φανῇ τῶν ἀνδϱαπόδων εἰς ἄνδϱας τελέσαντα σπουδαιότεϱα, ληϱεῖν ἐμὲ ϰαὶ μελαγχολᾶν νομίζετε. εἶτα οὕτως ἐστὲ δυστυχεῖς ϰαὶ ἀνόητοι, ὥστε νομίζειν ϑείους μὲν ἐϰείνους τοὺς λόγους, ὑφ̓ ὧν οὐδεὶς ἂν γένοιτο φϱονιμώτεϱος οὐδὲ ἀνδϱειότεϱος οὐδ̓ ἑαυτοῦ ϰϱείττων: ὑφ̓ ὧν δὲ ἔνεστιν ἀνδϱείαν, φϱόνησιν, διϰαιοσύνην πϱοσλαβεῖν, τούτους ἀποδίδοτε τῷ σατανᾷ ϰαὶ τοῖς τῷ σατανᾷ λατϱεύουσιν. [235b]Ἰᾶται Ἀσϰληπιὸς ἡμῶν τὰ σώματα, παιδεύουσιν ἡμῶν αἱ Μοῦσαι σὺν Ἀσϰληπιῷ ϰαὶ Ἀπόλλωνι ϰαὶ Ἑϱμῇ λογίῳ τὰς ψυχάς, Ἄϱης δὲ ϰαὶ Ἐνυὼ τὰ πϱὸς τὸν πόλεμον συναγωνίζεται, τὰ δὲ εἰς τέχνας Ἥφαιστος ἀποϰληϱοῖ ϰαὶ διανέμει, [235c]ταῦτα δὲ πάντα Ἀϑηνᾶ μετὰ τοῦ Διὸς παϱϑένος ἀμήτωϱ πϱυτανεύει. σϰοπεῖτε οὖν, εἰ μὴ ϰαϑ̓ ἕϰαστον τούτων ὑμῶν ἐσμεν ϰϱείττους, λέγω δὲ τὰ πεϱὶ τὰς τέχνας ϰαὶ σοφίαν ϰαὶ σύνεσιν: εἴτε γὰϱ τὰς πϱὸς τὴν χϱείαν σϰοπήσειας, εἴτε τὰς τοῦ ϰαλοῦ χάϱιν μιμητιϰάς, οἷον ἀγαλματοποιητιϰήν, γϱαφιϰήν, ἢ οἰϰονομιϰήν, ἰατϱιϰὴν τὴν ἐξ Ἀσϰληπιοῦ, οὗ πανταχοῦ γῆς ἐστι χϱηστήϱια, ἃ δίδωσιν ἡμῖν ὁ ϑεὸς μεταλαγχάνειν διηνεϰῶς. ἐμὲ γοῦν ἰάσατο πολλάϰις Ἀσϰληπιὸς ϰάμνοντα ὑπαγοϱεύσας [235d]φάϱμαϰα: ϰαὶ τούτων μάϱτυς ἐστὶ Ζεύς. εἰ τοίνυν οὐ πϱοσνείμαντες ἑαυτοὺς τῷ τῆς ἀποστασίας πνεύματι τὰ πεϱὶ ψυχὴν ἄμεινον ἔχομεν ϰαὶ πεϱὶ σῶμα ϰαὶ τὰ ἐϰτός, τίνος ἕνεϰεν ἀφέντες ταῦτα ἐπ̓ ἐϰεῖνα βαδίζετε; [238a]Ἀνϑ̓ ὅτου δὲ μηδὲ τοῖς Ἑβϱαϊϰοῖς λόγοις ἐμμένετε [238b]μήτε ἀγαπᾶτε τὸν νόμον, ὃν δέδωϰεν ὁ ϑεὸς ἐϰείνοις, ἀπολιπόντες δὲ τὰ πάτϱια ϰαὶ δόντες ἑαυτοὺς οἷς ἐϰήϱυξαν οἱ πϱοφῆται, πλέον ἐϰείνων ἢ τῶν παῤ ἡμῖν ἀπέστητε; τὸ γὰϱ ἀληϑὲς εἴ τις ὑπὲϱ ὑμῶν ἐϑέλοι σϰοπεῖν, εὑϱήσει τὴν ὑμετέϱαν ἀσέβειαν ἔϰ τε τῆς Ἰουδαϊϰῆς τόλμης ϰαὶ τῆς παϱὰ τοῖς ἔϑνεσιν ἀδιαφοϱίας ϰαὶ χυδαιότητος συγϰειμένην. ἐξ ἀμφοῖν γὰϱ οὔτι τὸ ϰάλλιστον, ἀλλὰ τὸ χεῖϱον ἑλϰύσαντες παϱυφὴν ϰαϰῶν εἰϱγάσασϑε. τοῖς μὲν γὰϱ Ἑβϱαίοις ἀϰϱιβῆ τὰ πεϱὶ [238c]ϑϱησϰείαν ἐστὶ νόμιμα ϰαὶ τὰ σεβάσματα ϰαὶ φυλάγματα μυϱία ϰαὶ δεόμενα βίου ϰαὶ πϱοαιϱέσεως ἱεϱατιϰῆς. ἀπαγοϱεύσαντος δὲ τοῦ νομοϑέτου τὸ πᾶσι μὴ δουλεύειν τοῖς ϑεοῖς, ἑνὶ δὲ μόνον, οὗ „μεϱίς ἐστιν Ἰαϰὼβ ϰαὶ σχοίνισμα ϰληϱονομίας Ἰσϱαήλ,“ οὐ τοῦτο δὲ μόνον εἰπόντος, ἀλλὰ γάϱ, οἶμαι, ϰαὶ πϱοσϑέντος „Οὐ ϰαϰολογήσεις ϑεούς,“ ἡ τῶν ἐπιγινομένων βδελυϱία τε ϰαὶ τόλμα, βουλομένη πᾶσαν εὐλάβειαν ἐξελεῖν τοῦ πλήϑους, ἀϰολουϑεῖν ἐνόμισε τῷ μὴ ϑεϱαπεύειν τὸ βλασφημεῖν, [238d]ὃ δὴ ϰαὶ ὑμεῖς ἐντεῦϑεν εἱλϰύσατε μόνον: ὡς τῶν γε ἄλλων οὐϑὲν ὑμῖν τέ ἐστι ϰἀϰείνοις παϱαπλήσιον. ἀπὸ μὲν οὖν τῆς Ἑβϱαίων ϰαινοτομίας τὸ βλασφημεῖν τοὺς παῤ ἡμῖν τιμωμένους ϑεοὺς ἡϱπάσατε. ἀπὸ δὲ τῆς παῤ ἡμῖν ϑϱησϰείας τὸ μὲν εὐσεβές τε ὁμοῦ πϱὸς ἅπασαν τὴν ϰϱείττονα φύσιν ϰαὶ τῶν πατϱίων ἀγαπητιϰὸν ἀπολελοίπατε, μόνον δ̓ ἐϰτήσασϑε τὸ πάντα ἐσϑίειν ὡς λάχανα χόϱτου. ϰαὶ εἰ χϱὴ τἀληϑὲς εἰπεῖν, ἐπιτεῖναι τὴν παῤ ἡμῖν ἐφιλοτιμήϑητε χυδαιότητα: [238e]τοῦτο δέ, οἶμαι, ϰαὶ μαλ̓ εἰϰότως, συμβαίνει πᾶσιν ἔϑνεσιν: ϰαὶ βίοις ἀνϑϱώπων εὐτελῶν, ϰαπήλων, τελωνῶν, ὀϱχηστῶν, ἑταιϱοτϱόφων ϰαὶ ἁϱμόττειν ᾠήϑητε τὰ παῤ ὑμῖν. [245a]Ὅτι δὲ οὐχ οἱ νῦν, ἀλλὰ ϰαὶ οἱ ἐξ ἀϱχῆς, οἱ πϱῶτοι παϱαδεξάμενοι τὸν λόγον παϱὰ τοῦ Παύλου [245b]τοιοῦτοί τινες γεγόνασιν, εὔδηλον ἐξ ὧν αὐτὸς ὁ Παῦλος μαϱτυϱεῖ πϱὸς αὐτοὺς γϱάφων. οὐ γὰϱ ἦν οὕτως ἀναίσχυντος, οἶμαι, ὡς μὴ συνειδὼς αὐτοῖς ὀνείδη τοσαῦτα πϱὸς αὐτοὺς ἐϰείνους ὑπὲϱ αὐτῶν γϱάφειν, ἐξ ὧν, εἰ ϰαὶ ἐπαίνους ἔγϱαψε τοσούτους αὐτῶν, εἰ ϰαὶ ἀληϑεῖς ἐτύγχανον, ἐϱυϑϱιᾶν ἦν, εἰ δὲ ψευδεῖς ϰαὶ πεπλασμένοι, ϰαταδύεσϑαι φεύγοντα τὸ μετὰ ϑωπείας λάγνου ϰαὶ ἀνελευϑέϱου ϰολαϰείας ἐντυγχάνειν δοϰεῖν. ἃ δὲ γϱάφει [245c]πεϱὶ τῶν ἀϰϱοασαμένων αὐτοῦ Παῦλος πϱὸς αὐτοὺς ἐϰείνους, ἐστὶ ταῦτα: „Μὴ πλανᾶσϑε: οὔτε εἰδωλολάτϱαι, οὔτε μοιχοί, οὔτε μαλαϰοί, οὔτε ἀϱσενοϰοῖται, οὔτε ϰλέπται, οὔτε πλεονέϰται, οὐ μέϑυσοι, οὐ λοίδοϱοι, οὐχ ἅϱπαγες βασιλείαν ϑεοῦ ϰληϱονομήσουσι. ϰαὶ ταῦτα οὐϰ ἀγνοεῖτε, ἀδελφοί, ὅτι ϰαὶ ὑμεῖς τοιοῦτοι ἦτε. ἀλλ̓ ἀπελούσασϑε, ἀλλ̓ ἡγιάσϑητε ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦ Χϱιστοῦ.“ ὁϱᾷς, ὅτι ϰαὶ τούτους γενέσϑαι φησὶ τοιούτους, ἁγιασϑῆναι δὲ ϰαὶ ἀπολούσασϑαι, ῥύπτειν ἱϰανοῦ ϰαὶ διαϰαϑαίϱειν ὕδατος εὐποϱήσαντος, [245d]ὃ μέχϱι ψυχῆς εἰσδύσεται; ϰαὶ τοῦ μὲν λεπϱοῦ τὴν λέπϱαν οὐϰ ἀφαιϱεῖται τὸ βάπτισμα, οὐδὲ λειχῆνας οὐδὲ ἀλφοὺς οὔτε ἀϰϱοχοϱδῶνας οὐδὲ ποδάγϱαν οὐδὲ δυσεντεϱίαν, οὐχ ὕδεϱον, οὐ παϱωνυχίαν, οὐ μιϰϱόν, οὐ μέγα τῶν τοῦ σώματος ἁμαϱτημάτων, μοιχείας δὲ ϰαὶ ἁϱπαγὰς ϰαὶ πάσας ἁπλῶς τῆς ψυχῆς παϱανομίας ἐξελεῖ;... [253a]Ἐπειδὴ δὲ πϱὸς μὲν τοὺς νυνὶ Ἰουδαίους διαφέϱεσϑαί φασιν, εἶναι δὲ ἀϰϱιβῶς Ἰσϱαηλῖται [253b]ϰατὰ τοὺς πϱοφήτας αὐτῶν, ϰαὶ τῷ Μωυσῇ μάλιστα πείϑεσϑαι ϰαὶ τοῖς ἀπ̓ ἐϰείνου πεϱὶ τὴν Ἰουδαίαν ἐπιγενομένοις πϱοφήταις, ἴδωμεν, ϰατὰ τί μάλιστα ὁμολογοῦσιν αὐτοῖς. ἀϱϰτέον δὲ ἡμῖν ἀπὸ τῶν Μωυσέως, ὃν δὴ ϰαὶ αὐτόν φασι πϱοϰηϱύξαι τὴν ἐσομένην Ἰησοῦ γέννησιν. ὁ τοίνυν Μωυσῆς οὐχ ἅπαξ οὐδὲ δὶς οὐδὲ τϱίς, ἀλλὰ πλειστάϰις ἕνα ϑεὸν μόνον ἀξιοῖ τιμᾶν, ὃν δὴ ϰαὶ ἐπὶ πᾶσιν ὀνομάζει, ϑεὸν δὲ ἕτεϱον οὐδαμοῦ: [253c]ἀγγέλους δὲ ὀνομάζει ϰαὶ ϰυϱίους ϰαὶ μέντοι ϰαὶ ϑεοὺς πλείονας, ἐξαίϱετον δὲ τὸν πϱῶτον, ἄλλον δὲ οὐχ ὑπείληφε δεύτεϱον οὔτε ὅμοιον οὔτε ἀνόμοιον, ϰαϑάπεϱ ὑμεῖς ἐπεξείϱγασϑε. εἰ δέ ἐστί που παῤ ὑμῖν ὑπὲϱ τούτων μία Μωυσέως ῥῆσις, ταύτην ἐστὲ δίϰαιοι πϱοφέϱειν. τὸ γὰϱ „Πϱοφήτην ὑμῖν ἀναστήσει ϰύϱιος ὁ ϑεὸς ἡμῶν ἐϰ τῶν ἀδελφῶν ὑμῶν ὡς ἐμέ: αὐτοῦ ἀϰούσεσϑε“ μάλιστα μὲν οὖν οὐϰ εἴϱηται πεϱὶ τοῦ γεννηϑέντος ἐϰ Μαϱίας. εἰ δέ τις ὑμῶν ἕνεϰα συγχωϱήσειεν, [253d]ἑαυτῷ φησιν αὐτὸν ὅμοιον γενήσεσϑαι ϰαὶ οὐ τῷ ϑεῷ, πϱοφήτην ὥσπεϱ ἑαυτὸν ϰαὶ ἐξ ἀνϑϱώπων, ἀλλ̓ οὐϰ ἐϰ ϑεοῦ. ϰαὶ τὸ „Οὐϰ ἐϰλείψει ἄϱχων ἐξ Ἰούδα οὐδὲ ἡγούμενος ἐϰ τῶν μηϱῶν αὐτοῦ“ μάλιστα μὲν οὐϰ εἴϱηται πεϱὶ τούτου, ἀλλὰ πεϱὶ τῆς τοῦ Δαβὶδ βασιλείας, ἣ δὴ ϰατέληξεν εἰς Σεδεϰίαν τὸν βασιλέα. ϰαὶ δὴ ἡ γϱαφὴ διπλῶς πως ἔχει „ἕως ἔλϑῃ τὰ ἀποϰείμενα αὐτῷ,“ παϱαπεποιήϰατε δὲ ὑμεῖς „ἕως ἔλϑῃ ᾧ ἀπόϰειται.“ [253e]ὅτι δὲ τούτων οὐδὲν τῷ Ἰησοῦ πϱοσήϰει, πϱόδηλον: οὐδὲ γάϱ ἐστιν ἐξ Ἰούδα. πῶς γὰϱ ὁ ϰαϑ̓ ὑμᾶς οὐϰ ἐξ Ἰωσήφ, ἀλλ̓ ἐξ ἁγίου πνεύματος γεγονώς; τὸν Ἰωσὴφ γὰϱ γενεαλογοῦντες εἰς τὸν Ἰούδαν ἀναφέϱετε ϰαὶ οὐδὲ τοῦτο ἐδυνήϑητε [p. 396] πλάσαι ϰαλῶς. ἐλέγχονται γὰϱ Ματϑαῖος ϰαὶ Λουϰᾶς πεϱὶ τῆς γενεαλογίας αὐτοῦ διαφωνοῦντες [261e]πϱὸς ἀλλήλους. ἀλλὰ πεϱὶ μὲν τοῦτου μέλλοντες ἐν τῷ δευτέϱῳ συγγϱάμματι τὸ ἀληϑὲς ἀϰϱιβῶς ἐξετάζειν, ὑπεϱτιϑέμεϑα. συγϰεχωϱήσϑω δὲ ϰαὶ ἄϱχων ἐξ Ἰούδα, οὐ „ϑεὸς ἐϰ ϑεοῦ“ ϰατὰ τὰ παῤ ὑμῶν λεγόμενα οὐδὲ „Τὰ πάντα δἰ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο ϰαὶ χωϱὶς αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο οὐδὲ ἕν.“ ἀλλ̓ εἴϱηται ϰαὶ ἐν τοῖς ἀϱιϑμοῖς: „Ἀνατελεῖ ἄστϱον ἐξ Ἰαϰὼβ ϰαὶ ἄνϑϱωπος ἐξ Ἰσϱαήλ.“ τοῦϑ̓ ὅτι τῷ Δαβὶδ πϱοσήϰει ϰαὶ τοῖς ἀπ̓ ἐϰείνου, πϱόδηλόν ἐστί που: τοῦ γὰϱ Ἰεσσαὶ παῖς ἦν ὁ Δαβίδ. Εἴπεϱ οὖν ἐϰ τούτων ἐπιχειϱεῖτε συμβιβάζειν, ἐπιδείξατε μίαν ἐϰεῖϑεν ἑλϰύσαντες ῥῆσιν, ὅποι πολλὰς πάνυ ἐγώ. ὅτι δὲ ϑεὸν τὸν ἕνα τὸν τοῦ Ἰσϱαὴλ νενόμιϰεν, ἐν τῷ Δευτεϱονομίῳ φησίν: „Ὥστε εἰδέναι δε, ὅτι ϰύϱιος ὁ ϑεός σου, οὗτος ϑεὸς εἶς ἐστι, ϰαὶ οὐϰ ἔστιν ἄλλος πλὴν αὐτοῦ.“ [262b]ϰαὶ ἔτι πϱὸς τούτῳ: „Καὶ ἐπιστϱαφήσῃ τῇ διανοίᾳ σου, ὅτι ϰύϱιος ὁ ϑεός σου οὗτος ϑεὸς ἐν τῷ οὐϱανῷ ἄνω ϰαὶ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ϰάτω ϰαὶ οὐϰ ἔστι πλὴν αὐτοῦ.“ ϰαὶ πάλιν: „Ἄϰουε, Ἰσϱαήλ, ϰύϱιος ὁ ϑεὸς ἡμῶν ϰύϱιος εἷς ἐστι.“ ϰαὶ πάλιν: „Ἴδετε, ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι ϰαὶ οὐϰ ἔστι ϑεὸς πλὴν ἐμοῦ.“ ταῦτα μὲν οὗν ὁ Μωυσῆς ἕνα διατεινόμενος μόνον εἶναι ϑεόν. ἀλλ̓ οὗτοι τυχὸν ἐϱοῦσιν: οὐδὲ ἡμεῖς δύο λέγομεν οὐδὲ τϱεῖς. ἐγὼ δὲ λέγοντας μὲν αὐτοὺς ϰαὶ τοῦτο δείξω, μαϱτυϱόμενος [p. 398] Ἰωάννην λέγοντα: „Ἐν ἀϱχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος“ [262c]„ϰαὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πϱὸς τὸν ϑεὸν ϰαὶ ϑεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.“ ὁϱᾷς, ὅτι πϱὸς τὸν ϑεὸν εἶναι λέγεται; εἴτε ὁ ἐϰ Μαϱίας γεννηϑεὶς εἴτε ἄλλος τίς ἐστιν—ἵν̓ ὁμοῦ ϰαὶ πϱὸς Φωτεινὸν ἀποϰϱίνωμαι—, διαφέϱει τοῦτο νῦν οὐδέν: ἀφίημι δῆτα τὴν μάχην ὑμῖν. ὅτι μέντοι φησὶ „πϱὸς ϑεὸν“ ϰαὶ „ἐν ἀϱχῇ,“ τοῦτο ἀπόχϱη μαϱτύϱασϑαι. πῶς οὖν ὁμολογεῖ ταῦτα τοῖς Μωυσέως; Ἀλλὰ τοῖς Ἡσαΐου, φασίν, ὁμολογεῖ. λέγει γὰϱ Ἡσαΐας: „Ἰδοὺ ἡ παϱϑένος ἐν γαστϱὶ ἕξει ϰαὶ τέξεται υἱόν.“ ἔστω δὴ ϰαὶ τοῦτο λεγόμενον [262d]ὑπὲϱ ϑεοῦ, ϰαίτοι μηδαμῶς εἰϱημένον: οὐ γὰϱ ἦν παϱϑένος ἡ γεγαμημένη ϰαὶ πϱὶν ἀποϰυῆσαι συγϰαταϰλιϑεῖσα τῷ γήμαντι: δεδόσϑω δὲ λέγεσϑαι πεϱὶ ταύτης—μή τι ϑεόν φησιν ἐϰ τῆς παϱϑένου τεχϑήσεσϑαι; ϑεοτόϰον δὲ ὑμεῖς οὐ παύεσϑε Μαϱίαν ϰαλοῦντες, εἰ μή πού φησι τὸν ἐϰ τῆς παϱϑένου γεννώμενον „υἱὸν ϑεοῦ μονογενῆ“ ϰαὶ „πϱωτότοϰον πάσης ϰτίσεως’; ἀλλὰ τὸ λεγόμενον ὑπὸ Ἰωάννου „Πάντα δἰ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο ϰαὶ χωϱὶς αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο οὐδὲ ἓν“ ἔχει τις ἐν ταῖς [262e]πϱοφητιϰαῖς δεῖξαι φωναῖς; ἃ δὲ ἡμεῖς δείϰνυμεν, ἐξ αὐτῶν ἐϰείνων ἑξῆς ἀϰούετε: „Κύϱιε, ὁ ϑεὸς ἡμῶν, ϰτῆσαι ἡμᾶς, ἐϰτὸς σοῦ ἄλλον οὐϰ οἴδαμεν’: πεποίηται δὲ παῤ αὐτῶν ϰαὶ Ἑζεϰίας ὁ βασιλεὺς εὐχόμενος: „Κύϱιε, ὁ ϑεὸς Ἰσϱαήλ, ὁ ϰαϑήμενος ἐπὶ τῶν Χεϱουβίμ, σὺ εἶ ὁ ϑεὸς μόνος.“ μή τι [276e]τῷ δευτέϱῳ ϰαταλείπει χώϱαν; ἀλλ̓ εἰ ϑεὸς ἐϰ ϑεοῦ ϰαϑ̓ ὑμᾶς ὁ λόγος ἐστὶ ϰαὶ τῆς οὐσίας ἐξέφυ τοῦ πατϱός, ϑεοτόϰον ὑμεῖς ἀνϑ̓ ὅτου τὴν παϱϑένον εἶναί φατε; πῶς γὰϱ ἂν τέϰοι ϑεὸν ἄνϑϱωπος οὖσα ϰαϑ̓ ὑμᾶς; ϰαὶ πϱός γε τούτῳ λέγοντος ἐναϱγῶς ϑεοῦ „Ἐγώ εἰμι ϰαὶ οὐϰ ἔστι πάϱεξ ἐμοῦ“ [277a]„σώζων,“ ὑμεῖς σωτῆϱα τὸν ἐξ αὐτῆς εἰπεῖν τετολμήϰατε; [290b]Ὅτι δὲ Μωυσῆς ὀνομάζει ϑεοὺς τοὺς ἀγγέλους, ἐϰ τῶν ἐϰείνου λόγων ἀϰούσατε: „Ἰδόντες δὲ οἱ“ [290c]„υἱοὶ τοῦ ϑεοῦ τὰς ϑυγατέϱας τῶν ἀνϑϱώπων ὅτι ϰαλαί εἰσιν, ἔλαβον ἑαυτοῖς γυναῖϰας ἀπὸ πασῶν ὧν ἐξελέξαντο.“ ϰαὶ μιϰϱὸν ὑποβάς: „Καὶ μετ̓ ἐϰεῖνο ὡς ἂν ἂν εἰσεποϱεύοντο οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ ϑεοῦ πϱὸς τὰς ϑυγατέϱας τῶν ἀνϑϱώπων, ϰαὶ ἐγεννῶσαν ἑαυτοῖς: ἐϰεῖνοι ἦσαν οἱ γίγαντες οἱ ἀπ̓ αἰῶνος οἱ ὀνομαστοί.“ ὅτι τοίνυν τοὺς ἀγγέλους φησίν, εὔδηλόν ἐστι ϰαὶ ἔξωϑεν οὐ πϱοσπαϱαϰείμενον, ἀλλὰ ϰαὶ δῆλον ἐϰ τοῦ φάναι, οὐϰ ἀνϑϱώπους, ἀλλὰ γίγαντας γεγονέναι παῤ ἐϰείνων. δῆλον γάϱ, ὡς, εἴπεϱ ἀνϑϱώπους ἐνόμιζεν αὐτῶν εἶναι [290d]τοὺς πατέϱας, ἀλλὰ μὴ ϰϱείττονος ϰαὶ ἰσχυϱοτέϱας τινὸς φύσεως, οὐϰ ἂν ἀπ̓ αὐτῶν εἶπε γεννηϑῆναι τοὺς γίγαντας: ἐϰ γὰϱ ϑνητοῦ ϰαὶ ἀϑανάτου μίξεως ἀποφήνασϑαί μοι δοϰεῖ τὸ τῶν γιγάντων ὑποστῆναι γένος. ὁ δὴ πολλοὺς υἱοὺς ὀνομάζων ϑεοῦ ϰαὶ τούτους οὐϰ ἀνϑϱώπους, ἀγγέλους δέ, τὸν μονογενῆ λόγον ϑεὸν ἢ υἱὸν ϑεοῦ ἢ [p. 402] ὅπως ἂν αὐτὸν ϰαλῆτε, εἴπεϱ ἐγίνωσϰεν, οὐϰ ἂν [290e]εἰς ἀνϑϱώπους ἐμήνυσεν; ὅτι δὲ οὐ μέγα τοῦτο ἐνόμιζεν, ὑπὲϱ τοῦ Ἰσϱαήλ φησιν: „υἱὸς πϱωτότοϰός μου Ἰσϱαήλ’; τί οὐχὶ ϰαὶ πεϱὶ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ταῦτ̓ ἔφη Μωυσῆς; ἕνα ϰαὶ μόνον ἐδίδασϰε ϑεόν, υἱοὺς δὲ αὐτοῦ πολλοὺς τοὺς ϰατανειμαμένους τὰ ἔϑνη. πϱωτότοϰον δὲ υἱὸν ϑεοῦ ἢ ϑεὸν λόγον ἤ τι τῶν ὑφ̓ ὑμῶν ὕστεϱον ψευδῶς συντεϑέντων οὔτε ᾔδει ϰατ̓ ἀϱχὴν οὔτε ἐδίδασϰε φανεϱῶς. αὐτοῦ τε Μωυσέως ϰαὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἐπηϰούσατε [291a]πϱοφητῶν. ὁ οὖν Μωυσῆς πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ϰαὶ πολλαχοῦ λέγει: „Κύϱιον τὸν ϑεόν σου φοβηϑήσῃ ϰαὶ αὐτῷ μόνῳ λατϱεύσεις.“ πῶς οὖν ὁ Ἰησοῦς ἐν τοῖς εὐαγγελίοις παϱαδέδοται πϱοστάττων „Ποϱευϑέντες μαϑητεύσατε πάντα τὰ ἔϑην, βαπτίζοντες αὐτοὺς εἴς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ πατϱὸς ϰαὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ ϰαὶ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος,“ εἴπεϱ μὴ ϰαὶ αὐτῷ λατϱεύειν ἔμελλον; ἀϰόλουϑα δὲ τούτοις ϰαὶ ὑμεῖς διανοούμενοι μετὰ τοῦ πατϱὸς ϑεολογεῖτε τὸν υἱόν... Ὑπὲϱ δὲ ἀποτϱοπαίων ἐπάϰουσον πάλιν ὅσα λέγει: „Καὶ λήψεται δύο τϱάγους ἐξ αἰγῶν πεϱὶ ἁμαϱτίας ϰαὶ ϰϱιὸν ἕνα εἰς ὁλοϰαύτωμα.“ [299b]‘ϰαὶ πϱοσάξει ὁ Ἀαϱὼν τὸν μόσχον τὸν πεϱὶ τῆς ἁμαϱτίας τὸν πεϱὶ ἑαυτοῦ ϰαὶ ἐξιλάσεται πεϱὶ αὐτοῦ ϰαὶ τοῦ οἴϰου αὐτοῦ. ϰαὶ λήψεται τοὺς δύο τϱάγους ϰαὶ στήσει αὐτοὺς ἔναντι ϰυϱίου παϱὰ τὴν ϑύϱαν τῆς σϰηνῆς τοῦ μαϱτυϱίου. ϰαὶ ἐπιϑήσει Ἀαϱὼν ἐπὶ τοὺς δύο τϱάγους ϰλῆϱον ἕνα τῷ ϰυϱίῳ ϰαὶ ϰλῆϱον ἕνα τῷ ἀποπομπαίῳ,“ ὥστε ἐϰπέμψαι αὐτόν, φησίν, ἀποπομπήν, ϰαὶ ἀφεῖναι αὐτὸν εἰς τὴν ἔϱημον. ὁ μὲν οὖν τῷ ἀποπομπαίῳ πεμπόμενος οὕτως ἐϰπέμπεται. τὸν δέ γε ἕτεϱον τϱάγον φησί: „Καὶ“ [299c]„σφάξει τὸν τϱάγον τὸν πεϱὶ τῆς ἁμαϱτίας τοῦ λαοῦ ἔναντι ϰυϱίου, ϰαὶ εἰσοίσει τοῦ αἵματος αὐτοῦ ἐσώτεϱον τοῦ ϰαταπετάσματος, ϰαὶ ῥανεῖ τὸ αἷμα ἐπὶ τὴν βάσιν τοῦ ϑυσιαστηϱίου, ϰαὶ ἐξιλάσεται ἐπὶ τῶν ἁγίων ἀπὸ τῶν ἀϰαϑαϱσιῶν τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσϱαὴλ ϰαὶ ἀπὸ τῶν ἀδιϰημάτων αὐτῶν“ [305b]„πεϱὶ πασῶν τῶν ἁμαϱτιῶν αὐτῶν.“ ὡς μὲν οὖν τοὺς τῶν ϑυσιῶν ἠπίστατο τϱόπους Μωυσῆς, εὔδηλόν ἐστί που διὰ τῶν ῥηϑέντων. ὅτι δὲ οὐχ ὡς ὑμεῖς ἀϰάϑαϱτα ἐνόμισεν αὐτά, πάλιν ἐϰ τῶν ἐϰείνου ῥημάτων ἐπαϰούσατε: „Ἡ δὲ ψυχή, ἥτις ἐὰν φάγῃ ἀπὸ τῶν ϰϱεῶν τῆς ϑυσίας τοῦ σωτηϱίου, ὅ ἐστι ϰυϱίου, ϰαὶ ἡ ἀϰαϑαϱσία αὐτοῦ ἐπ̓ αὐτῷ, ἀπολεῖται ἡ ψυχὴ ἐϰείνη ἐϰ τοῦ λαοῦ αὐτῆς.“ αὐτὸς οὕτως εὐλαβὴς ὁ Μωυσῆς πεϱὶ τὴν τῶν ἱεϱῶν ἐδωδήν. [305d]Πϱοσήϰει δὴ λοιπὸν ἀναμνησϑῆναι τῶν ἔμπϱοσϑεν, ὧν ἕνεϰεν ἐϱϱήϑη ϰαὶ ταῦτα. διὰ τί γὰϱ ἀποστάντες ἡμῶν οὐχὶ τὸν τῶν Ἰουδαίων ἀγαπᾶτε νόμον οὐδὲ ἐμμένετε τοῖς ὑπ̓ ἐϰείνου λεγομένοις; ἐϱεῖ πάντως τις ὀξὺ βλέπων: οὐδὲ [p. 406] γὰϱ Ἰουδαῖοι ϑύουσιν. ἀλλ̓ ἔγωγε ἀμβλυώττοντα δεινῶς αὐτὸν ἀπελέγξω, πϱῶτον μέν, ὅτι μηδὲ τῶν ἄλλων τι τῶν παϱὰ τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις νενομισμένων ἐστὶ ϰαὶ ὑμῖν ἐν φυλαϰῇ: δεύτεϱον δέ, ὅτι ϑύουσι μὲν ἐν ἀδϱάϰτοις Ἰουδαῖοι ϰαὶ νῦν ἔτι [306a]πάντα ἐσϑίουσιν ἱεϱὰ ϰαὶ ϰατεύχονται πϱὸ τοῦ ϑῦσαι ϰαὶ τὸν δεξιὸν ὦμον διδόασιν ἀπαϱχὰς τοῖς ἱεϱεῦσιν, ἀπεστεϱημένοι δὲ τοῦ ναοῦ, ἤ, ὡς αὐτοῖς ἔϑος λέγειν, τοῦ ἁγιάσματος, ἀπαϱχὰς τῷ ϑεῷ τῶν ἱεϱείων εἴϱγονται πϱοσφέϱειν. ὑμεῖς δὲ οἱ τὴν ϰαινὴν ϑυσίαν εὑϱόντες, οὐδὲν δεόμενοι τῆς Ἱεϱουσαλήμ, ἀντὶ τίνος οὐ ϑύετε; ϰαίτοι τοῦτο [306b]μὲν ἐγὼ πϱὸς ὑμᾶς ἐϰ πεϱιουσίας εἶπον, ἐπεί μοι τὴν ἀϱχὴν ἐϱϱέϑη βουλομένῳ δεῖξαι τοῖς ἔϑνεσιν ὁμολογοῦντας Ἰουδαίους ἔξω τοῦ νομίζειν ἕνα ϑεὸν μόνον. ἐϰεῖνο γὰϱ αὐτῶν μὲν ἴδιον, ἡμῶν δὲ ἀλλότϱιον, ἐπεὶ τά γε ἄλλα ϰοινά πως ἡμῖν ἐστι, ναοί, τεμένη, ϑυσιαστήϱια, ἁγνεῖαι, φυλάγματά τινα, πεϱὶ ὧν ἢ τὸ παϱάπαν οὐδαμῶς ἢ μιϰϱὰ διαφεϱόμεϑα πϱὸς ἀλλήλους... [314c]Ἀνϑ̓ ὅτου πεϱὶ τὴν δίαιταν οὐχὶ τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις ὁμοίως ἐστὲ ϰαϑαϱοί, πάντα δὲ ἐσϑίειν ὡς λάχανα χόϱτου δεῖν φατε Πέτϱῳ πιστεύσαντες, ὅτι, φασίν, εἶπεν ἐϰεῖνος: „Ἃ ὁ ϑεὸς ἐϰαϑάϱισε, σὺ μὴ ϰοίνου’; τί τούτου τεϰμήϱιον, ὅτι πάλαι μὲν [314d]ἄττα ἐνόμιζεν ὀ ϑεὸς μιαϱά, νυνὶ δὲ ϰαϑαϱὰ πεποίηϰεν αὐτά; Μωυσῆς μὲν γὰϱ ἐπὶ τῶν τετϱαπόδων ἐπισημαινόμενος πᾶν τὸ διχηλοῦν, φησίν, ὁπλὴν ϰαὶ ἀναμαϱυϰίζον μαϱυϰισμὸν ϰαϑαϱὸν εἶναι, τὸ δὲ μὴ τοιοῦτον ἀϰάϑαϱτον εἶναι. εἰ μὲν οὖν ὁ χοῖϱος ἀπὸ τῆς φαντασίας Πέτϱου νῦν πϱοσέλαβε τὸ μαϱυϰᾶσϑαι, πεισϑῶμεν αὐτῷ: τεϱάστιον γὰϱ ὡς ἀληϑῶς, εἰ μετὰ τὴν φαντασίαν Πέτϱου πϱοσέλαβεν αὐτό. εἰ δὲ ἐϰεῖνος ἐψεύσατο ταύτην ἑωϱαϰέναι, ἵν̓ εἴπω ϰαϑ̓ ὑμᾶς, τὴν ἀποϰάλυψιν [314e]ἐπὶ τοῦ βυϱσοδεψίου, τί ἐπὶ τηλιϰούτων οὕτω ταχέως πιστεύσομεν; τί γὰϱ ὁ Μωυσῆς ὑμῖν ἐπέταξε τῶν χαλεπῶν, εἰ ἀπηγόϱευσεν ἐσϑίειν πϱὸς τοῖς ὑείοις τὰ τε πτηνὰ ϰαὶ τὰ ϑαλάττια, ἀποφηνάμενος ὑπὸ τοῦ ϑεοῦ ϰαὶ ταῦτα πϱὸς ἐϰείνοις ἐϰβεβλῆσϑαι ϰαὶ ἀϰάϑαϱτα πεφηνέναι; [319d]Ἀλλὰ τί ταῦτα ἐγὼ μαϰϱολογῶ λεγόμενα παῤ αὐτῶν, ἐξὸν ἰδεῖν, εἴ τινα ἰσχὺν ἔχει; λέγουσι γὰϱ τὸν ϑεὸν ἐπὶ τῷ πϱοτέϱῳ νόμῳ ϑεῖναι τὸν δεύτεϱον. ἐϰεῖνον μὲν γὰϱ γενέσϑαι πϱὸς ϰαιϱὸν πεϱιγεγϱαμμένον χϱόνοις ὡϱισμένοις, ὕστεϱον δὲ τοῦτον ἀναφανῆναι διὰ τὸ τὸν Μωυσέως χϱόνῳ τε ϰαὶ τόπῳ πεϱιγεγϱάφϑαι. τοῦτο ὅτι ψευδῶς λέγουσιν, ἀποδείξω σαφῶς, ἐϰ μὲν τῶν Μωυσέως οὐ δέϰα μόνας, ἀλλὰ μυϱίας παϱεχόμενος μαϱτυϱίας, [319e]ὅπου τὸν νόμον αἰώνιόν φησιν. ἀϰούετε δὲ νῦν ἀπὸ τῆς ἐξόδου. „Καὶ ἔσται ἡ ἡμέϱα αὕτη ὑμῖν μνημόσυνον, ϰαὶ ἑοϱτάσατε αὐτὴν ἑοϱτὴν ϰυϱίῳ εἰς τὰς γενεὰς ὑμῶν. νόμιμον αἰώνιον ἑοϱτάσατε αὐτήν. ἀπὸ δὲ τῆς ἡμέϱας τῆς πϱώτης ἀφανιεῖτε ζύμην ἐϰ τῶν οἰϰιῶν ὑμῶν.’... πολλῶν ἔτι τοιούτων παϱαλελειμμένων, ἀφ̓ ὧν τὸν νόμον τοῦ Μωυσέως αἰώνιον ἐγὼ μὲν εἰπεῖν διὰ τὸ πλῆϑος παϱῃτησάμην: ὑμεῖς δὲ ἐπιδείξατε, ποῦ τὸ παϱὰ τοῦ Παύλου μετὰ τοῦτο τολμηϑὲν εἴϱηται, ὅτι δὴ „τέλος νόμου Χϱιστός.“ ποῦ τοῖς Ἑβϱαίοις ὁ ϑεὸς [320b]ἐπηγγείλατο νόμον ἕτεϱον παϱὰ τὸν ϰείμενον; οὐϰ ἔστιν οὐδαμοῦ, οὐδὲ τοῦ ϰειμένου διόϱϑωσις. ἄϰουε γὰϱ τοῦ Μωυσέως πάλιν: „Οὐ πϱοσϑήσετε ἐπὶ τὸ ῥῆμα, ὃ ἐγὼ ἐντέλλομαι ὑμῖν, ϰαὶ οὐϰ ἀφελεῖτε ἀπ̓ αὐτοῦ. φυλάξασϑε τὰς ἐντολὰς ϰυϱίου τοψ̂ ϑεοῦ ὑμῶν, ὅσα ἐγὼ ἐντέλλομαι ὑμῖν σήμεϱον“ ϰαὶ „Ἐπιϰατάϱατος πᾶς ὃς οὐϰ ἐμμένει πᾶσιν.“ ὑμεῖς δὲ τὸ μὲν ἀφελεῖν ϰαὶ πϱοσϑεῖναι τοῖς γεγϱαμμένοις ἐν τῷ νόμῳ μιϰϱὸν ἐνομίσατε, τὸ δὲ παϱαβῆναι τελείως αὐτὸν ἀνδϱειότεϱον τῷ [320c]παντὶ ϰαὶ μεγαλοψυχότεϱον, οὐ πϱὸς ἀλήϑειαν, ἀλλ̓ εἰς τὸ πᾶσι πιϑανὸν βλέποντες... [327a]Οὕτω δὲ ἐστε δυστυχεῖς, ὥστε οὐδὲ τοῖς ὑπὸ τῶν ἀποστόλων ὑμῖν παϱαδεδομένοις ἐμμενενήϰατε: ϰαὶ ταῦτα δὲ ἐπὶ τὸ χεῖϱον ϰαὶ δυσσεβέστεϱον ὑπὸ τῶν ἐπιγινομένων ἐξειϱγάσϑη. τὸν γοῦν Ἰησοῦν οὔτε Παῦλος ἐτόλμησεν εἰπεῖν ϑεὸν οὔτε Ματϑαῖος οὔτε Λουϰᾶς οὔτε Μάϱϰος. ἀλλ̓ [327b]ὁ χϱηστὸς Ἰωάννης, αἰσϑόμενος ἤδη πολὺ πλῆϑος ἑαλωϰὸς ἐν πολλαῖς τῶν Ἑλληνίδων ϰαὶ Ἰταλιωτίδων πόλεων ὑπὸ ταύτης τῆς νόσου, ἀϰούων δέ, οἶμαι, ϰαὶ τὰ μνήματα Πέτϱου ϰαὶ Παύλου λάϑϱᾳ μέν, ἀϰούων δὲ ὅμως αὐτὰ ϑεϱαπευόμενα πϱῶτος ἐτόλμησεν εἰπεῖν. μιϰϱὰ δὲ εἰπὼν πεϱὶ Ἰωάννου τοῦ βαπτιστοῦ, πάλιν ἐπανάγων ἐπὶ τὸν ὑπ̓ αὐτοῦ ϰηϱυττόμενον λόγον „Καὶ ὁ λόγος“ φησὶ „σάϱξ ἐγένετο ϰαὶ ἐσϰήνωσεν ἐν ἡμῖν,“ τὸ δὲ ὅπως οὐ λέγει αἰσχυνόμενος. οὐδαμοῦ δὲ αὐτὸν [327c]οὔτε Ἰησοῦν οὔτε Χϱιστόν, ἄχϱις οὗ ϑεὸν ϰαὶ λόγον ἀποϰαλεῖ, ϰλέπτων δὲ ὥσπεϱ ἠϱέμα ϰαὶ λάϑϱᾳ τὰς ἀϰοὰς ἡμῶν, Ἰωάννην φησὶ τὸν βαπτιστὴν ὑπὲϱ Χϱιστοῦ Ἰησοῦ ταύτην ἐϰϑέσϑαι τὴν μαϱτυϱίαν, ὅτι ἄῤ οὗτός ἐστιν, ὃν χϱὴ πεπιστευϰέναι [333b]ϑεὸν εἶναι λόγον. ἀλλ̓ ὅτι μὲν τοῦτο πεϱὶ Ἰησοῦ Χϱιστοῦ φησιν Ἰωάννης, οὐδὲ αὐτὸς ἀντιλέγω. ϰαίτοι δοϰεῖ τισι τῶν δυσσεβῶν ἄλλον ϑεὸν εἶναι λόγον. ἀλλ̓ ὅτι μὲν τοῦτο πεϱὶ Ἰησοῦ Χϱιστοῦ φησιν Ἰωάννης, οὐδὲ αὐτὸς ἀντιλέγω. ϰαίτοι δοϰεῖ τισι τῶν δυσσεβῶν ἄλλον [333c]μὲν Ἰησοῦν εἶναι Χϱιστόν, ἄλλον δὲ τὸν ὑπὸ Ἰωάννου ϰηϱυττόμενον λόγον. οὐ μὴν οὕτως ἔχει. ὃν γὰϱ αὐτὸς εἶναί φησι ϑεὸν λόγον, τοῦτον ὑπὸ Ἰωάννου φησὶν ἐπιγνωσϑῆναι τοῦ βαπτιστοῦ Χϱιστὸν Ἰησοῦν ὄντα. σϰοπεῖτε οὖν, ὅπως εὐλαβῶς, ἠϱέμα ϰαὶ λεληϑότως ἐπεισάγει [p. 414] τῷ δϱάματι τὸν ϰολοφῶνα τῆς ἀσεβείας οὕτω τέ ἐστι πανοῦϱγος ϰαὶ ἀπατεών, ὥστε αὖϑις ἀναδύεται πϱοστιϑείς: „Θεὸν οὐδεὶς ἑώϱαϰε πώποτε: ὁ μονογενὴς υἱός, ὁ ὢν ἐν τοῖς ϰόλποις τοῦ πατϱός,“ [333d]„ἐϰεῖνος ἐξηγήσατο.“ πότεϱον οὖν οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ϑεὸς λόγος σάϱξ γενόμενος, ὁ μονογενὴς υἱός, ὁ ὢν ἐν τοῖς ϰόλποις τοῦ πατϱός; ϰαὶ εἰ μὲν αὐτός, ὅνπεϱ οἶμαι, ἐϑεάσασϑε δήπουϑεν ϰαὶ ὑμεῖς ϑεόν. „ἐσϰήνωσε“ γὰϱ „ἐν ὑμῖν ϰαὶ ἐϑεάσασϑε τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ.“ τί οὖν ἐπιλέγεις, ὅτι ϑεὸν οὐδεὶς ἑώϱαϰε πώποτε; ἐϑεάσασϑε γὰϱ ὑμεῖς εἰ ϰαὶ μὴ τὸν πατέϱα ϑεόν, ἀλλὰ τὸν ϑεὸν λόγον. εἰ δὲ ἄλλος ἐστὶν ὁ μονογενὴς υἱός, ἕτεϱος δὲ ὁ ϑεὸς λόγος, ὡς ἐγώ τινων ἀϰήϰοα τῆς ὑμετέϱας αἱϱέσεως, ἔοιϰεν οὐδὲ ὁ Ἰωάννης αὐτὸ τολμᾶν ἔτι. [335b]Ἀλλὰ τοῦτο μὲν τὸ ϰαϰὸν ἔλαβε παϱὰ Ἰωάννου τὴν ἀϱχήν: ὅσα δὲ ὑμεῖς ἑξῆς πϱοσευϱήϰατε, πολλοὺς ἐπεισάγοντες τῷ πάλαι νεϰϱῷ τοὺς πϱοσφάτους νεϰϱούς, τίς ἂν πϱὸς ἀξίαν βδελύξαιτο; πάντα [335c]ἐπληϱώσατε τάφων ϰαὶ μνημάτων, ϰαίτοι οὐϰ εἴϱηται παῤ ὑμῖν οὐδαμοῦ τοῖς τάφοις πϱοσϰαλινδεῖσϑαι ϰαὶ πεϱιέπειν αὐτούς. εἰς τοῦτο δὲ πϱοεληλύϑατε μοχϑηϱίας, ὥστε οἴεσϑαι δεῖν ὑπὲϱ τούτου μηδὲ τῶν γε Ἰησοῦ τοῦ Ναζωϱαίου ῥημάτων ἀϰούειν. ἀϰούετε οὖν, ἅ φησιν ἐϰεῖνος πεϱὶ τῶν μνημάτων: „Οὐαὶ ὑμῖν, γϱαμματεῖς ϰαὶ Φαϱισαῖοι ὑποϰϱιταί, ὅτι παϱομοιάζετε τάφοις ϰεϰονιαμένοις: ἔξωϑεν ὁ τάφος φαίνεται ὡϱαῖος, ἔσωϑεν δὲ γέμει ὀστέων νεϰϱῶν ϰαὶ πάσης ἀϰαϑαϱσίας.“ [335d]εἰ τοίνυν ἀϰαϑαϱσίας Ἰησοῦς ἔφη πλήϱεις εἶναι τοὺς τάφους, πῶς ὑμεῖς ἐπ̓ αὐτῶν ἐπιϰαλεῖσϑε τὸν ϑεόν;... [339e]Τούτων οὖν οὕτως ἐχόντων, ὑμεῖς ὑπὲϱ τίνος πϱοσϰαλινδεῖσϑε τοῖς μνήμασι; ἀϰοῦσαι βούλεσϑε τὴν αἰτίαν; οὐϰ ἐγὼ φαίην ἄν, ἀλλ̓ Ἡσαΐας ὁ πϱοφήτης. „Ἐν τοῖς μνήμασι ϰαὶ ἐν τοῖς σπηλαίοις“ [340a]„ϰοιμῶνται δἰ ἐνύπνια.“ σϰοπεῖτε οὖν, ὅπως παλαιὸν ἦν τοῦτο τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις τῆς μαγγανείας τὸ ἔϱγον, ἐγϰαϑεύδειν τοῖς μνήμασιν ἐνυπνίων χάϱιν. ὃ δὴ ϰαὶ τοὺς ἀποστόλους ὑμῶν εἰϰός ἐστι μετὰ τὴν τοῦ διδασϰάλου τελευτὴν ἐπιτηδεύσαντας ὑμῖν τε ἐξ ἀϱχῆς παϱαδοῦναι τοῖς πϱώτοις πεπιστευϰόσι, ϰαὶ τεχνιϰώτεϱον ὑμῶν αὐτοὺς μαγγανεῦσαι, τοῖς δὲ μεϑ̓ ἑαυτοὺς ἀποδεῖξαι δημοσίᾳ τῆς μαγγανείας ταύτης ϰαὶ βδελυϱίας τὰ ἐϱγαστήϱια. [343c]Ὑμεῖς δέ, ἃ μὲν ὁ ϑεὸς ἐξ ἀϱχῆς ἐβδελύξατο ϰαὶ διὰ Μωυσέως ϰαὶ τῶν πϱοφητῶν, ἐπιτηδεύετε, πϱοσάγειν δὲ ἱεϱεῖα βωμῷ ϰαὶ ϑύειν παϱῃτήσασϑε. πῦϱ γάϱ, φασίν, οὐ ϰάτεισιν, ὥσπεϱ ἐπὶ Μωυσέως [343d]τὰς ϑυσίας ἀναλίσϰον. ἅπαξ τοῦτο ἐπὶ Μωνσέως ἐγένετο ϰαὶ ἐπὶ Ἡλίου τοῦ Θεσβίτου πάλιν μετὰ πολλοὺς χϱόνους. ἐπεί, ὅτι γε πῦϱ ἐπείσαϰτον αὐτὸς ὁ Μωυσῆς εἰσφέϱειν οἴεται χϱῆναι ϰαὶ Ἁβϱαὰμ ὁ πατϱιάϱχης ἔτι πϱὸ τούτου, δηλώσω διὰ βϱαχέων... [346e]Καὶ οὐ τοῦτο μόνον, ἀλλὰ ϰαὶ τῶν υἱῶν Ἀδὰμ ἀπαϱχὰς τῷ ϑεῷ διδόντων, „Ἐπεῖδεν ὁ ϑεὸς“ [347a]φησὶν „ἐπὶ Ἄβελ ϰαὶ ἐπὶ τοῖς δώϱοις αὐτοῦ. ἐπὶ δὲ Κάιν ϰαὶ ἐπὶ ταῖς ϑυσίαις αὐτοῦ οὐ πϱοσέσχε. ϰαὶ ἐλύπησε τὸν Κάιν λίαν, ϰαὶ συνέπεσε τὸ πϱόσωπον αὐτοῦ. ϰαὶ εἶπε ϰύϱιος ὁ ϑεὸς τῷ Κάιν: Ἵνα τί πεϱίλυπος ἐγένου, ϰαὶ ἵνα τί συνέπεσε τὸ πϱόσωπόν σου; οὐϰ ἐὰν ὀϱϑῶς πϱοσενέγϰῃς, ὀϱϑῶς δὲ μὴ διέλῃς, ἥμαϱτες;“ ἀϰοῦσαι οὖν ἐπιποϑεῖτε, τίνες ἦσαν αὐτῶν αἱ πϱοσφοϱαί; „Καὶ ἐγένετο μεϑ̓ ἡμέϱας, ἀνήνεγϰε Κάιν ἀπὸ τῶν ϰαϱπῶν τῆς γῆς ϑυσίαν τῷ ϰυϱίῳ. ϰαὶ Ἄβελ“ [347b]„ἤνεγϰε ϰαὶ αὐτὸς ἀπὸ τῶν πϱωτοτόϰων τῶν πϱοβάτων ϰαὶ ἀπὸ τῶν στεάτων αὐτῶν.“ ναί, φασίν, οὐ τὴν ϑυσίαν, ἀλλὰ τὴν διαίϱεσιν ἐμέμψατο πϱὸς Κάιν εἰπών: „Οὐϰ ἐὰν ὀϱϑῶς πϱοσενέγϰῃς, ὀϱϑῶς δὲ μὴ διέλῃς, ἥμαϱτες;“ τοῦτο ἔφη τις πϱὸς ἐμὲ τῶν πάνυ σοφῶν ἐπισϰόπων: ὁ δὲ ἠπάτα μὲν ἑαυτὸν πϱῶτον, εἶτα ϰαὶ τοὺς ἄλλους. ἡ γὰϱ διαίϱεσις μεμπτὴ ϰατὰ τίνα τϱόπον ἦν, ἀπαιτούμενος, οὐϰ εἶχεν ὅπως διεξέλϑῃ, οὐδέ ὅπως πϱὸς ἐμὲ ψυχϱολογήσῃ. βλέπων δὲ αὐτὸν ἐξαποϱούμενον, [p. 420] „Αὐτὸ τοῦτο,“ εἶπον „ὃ σὺ λέγεις, ὁ ϑεὸς ὀϱϑῶς ἐμέμψατο. τὸ μὲν γὰϱ τῆς πϱοϑυμίας ἴσον ἦν ἀπ̓ ἀμφοτέϱων, ὅτι δῶϱα ὑπέλαβον χϱῆναι ϰαὶ ϑυσίας ἀναφέϱειν ἀμφότεϱοι τῷ ϑεῷ. πεϱὶ δὲ τὴν διαίϱεσιν ὁ μὲν ἔτυχεν, ὁ δὲ ἥμαϱτε τοῦ σϰοποῦ. πῶς ϰαὶ τίνα τϱόπον; ἐπειδὴ γὰϱ τῶν ἐπὶ γῆς ὄντων τὰ μέν ἐστιν ἔμψυχα, τὰ δὲ ἄψυχα, τιμιώτεϱα δὲ τῶν ἀψύχων ἐστὶ τὰ ἔμψυχα τῷ ζῶντι ϰαὶ ζωῆς αἰτίῳ ϑεῷ, ϰαϑὸ ϰαὶ ζωῆς μετείληφε ϰαὶ ψυχῆς οἰϰειοτέϱας —διὰ τοῦτο τῷ τελείαν πϱοσάγοντι ϑυσίαν ὁ ϑεὸς ἐπηυφϱάνϑη.“ [351a]Νυνὶ δὲ ἐπαναληπτέον ἐστί μοι πϱὸς αὐτούς: διὰ τί γὰϱ οὐχὶ πεϱιτέμνεσϑε; „Παῦλος,“ φασίν, „εἶπε πεϱιτομὴν ϰαϱδίας, ἀλλ̓ οὐχὶ τῆς σαϱϰὸς δεδόσϑαι πιστεύσαντι τῷ Ἁβϱαάμ. οὐ μὴν ἔτι τὰ ϰατὰ σάϱϰα ἔφη, ϰαὶ δεῖ πιστεῦσαι τοῖς ὑπ̓ αὐτοῦ ϰαὶ Πέτϱου ϰηϱυττομένοις λόγοις οὐϰ ἀσεβέσιν.“ ἄϰουε δὲ πάλιν, ὅτι τὴν ϰατὰ σάϱϰα πεϱιτομὴν εἰς διαϑήϰην ὁ ϑεὸς λέγεται δοῦναι ϰαὶ [351b]εἰς σημεῖον τῷ Ἁβϱαάμ: „Καὶ αὕτη ἡ διαϑήϰη, ἣν διατηϱήσεις ἀνὰ μέσον ἐμοῦ ϰαὶ σοῦ ϰαὶ ἀνὰ μέσον τοῦ σπέϱματός σου εἰς τὰς γενεὰς ὑμῶν. ϰαὶ πεϱιτμηϑήσεσϑε τὴν σάϱϰα τῆς ἀϰϱοβυστίας ὑμῶν, ϰαὶ ἔσται ἐν σημείῳ διαϑήϰης ἀνὰ μέσον ἐμοῦ ϰαὶ σοῦ ϰαὶ ἀνὰ μέσον ἐμοῦ ϰαὶ τοῦ σπέϱματός σου.’...ὅτε τοίνυν, ὅτι πϱοσήϰει τηϱεῖν τὸν νόμον, ἀναμφισβητήτως πϱοστέταχε ϰαὶ τοῖς μίαν παϱαβαίνουσιν ἐντολὴν ἐπήϱτησε δίϰας, ὑμεῖς, οἱ συλλήβδην ἁπάσας παϱαβεβηϰότες, ὁποῖον εὑϱήσετε τῆς ἀπολογίας τὸν τϱόπον; ἢ γὰϱ ψευδοεπήσει ὁ Ἰησοῦς, ἤγουν ὑμεῖς πάντη [351d]ϰαὶ πάντως οὐ νομοφύλαϰες. „Ἡ πεϱιτομὴ ἔσται“ [354a]„πεϱὶ τὴν σάϱϰα σου,“ ὁ Μωυσῆς φησι. παϱαϰούσαντες τούτου „Τὰς ϰαϱδίας“ φασὶ „πεϱιτεμνόμεϑα.“ πάνυ γε: οὐδεὶς γὰϱ παῤ ὑμῖν ϰαϰοῦϱγος, οὐδεὶς μοχϑηϱός: οὕτω πεϱιτέμνεσϑε τὰς ϰαϱδίας. „Τηϱεῖν ἄζυμα ϰαὶ ποιεῖν τὸ πάσχα οὐ δυνάμεϑα“ φασίν: „ὑπὲϱ ἡμῶν γὰϱ ἅπαξ ἐτύϑη Χϱιστός.“ ϰαλῶς: εἶτα ἐϰώλυσεν ἐσϑίειν ἄζυμα; ϰαίτοι, μὰ τοὺς ϑεούς, εἷς εἰμι τῶν [354b]ἐϰτϱεπομένων συνεοϱτάζειν Ἰουδαίοις, ἀεὶ δὲ πϱοσϰυνῶν τὸν ϑεὸν Ἁβϱαὰμ ϰαὶ Ἰσαὰϰ ϰαὶ Ἰαϰώβ, οἳ ὄντες αὐτοὶ Χαλδαῖοι, γένους ἱεϱοῦ ϰαὶ ϑεουϱγιϰοῦ, τὴν μὲν πεϱιτομὴν ἔμαϑον Αἰγυπτίοις ἐπιξενωϑέντες, ἐσεβάσϑησαν δὲ ϑεόν, ὃς ἐμοὶ ϰαὶ τοῖς αὐτόν, ὥσπεϱ Ἁβϱαὰμ ἔσεβε, σεβομένοις εὐμενὴς ἦν, μέγας τε ὢν πάνυ ϰαὶ δυνατός, ὑμῖν δὲ οὐδὲν πϱοσήϰων. οὐδὲ γὰϱ τὸν Ἁβϱαὰμ μιμεῖσϑε, βωμούς τε ἐγείϱοντες αὐτῷ ϰαὶ οἰϰοδομοῦντες [354c]ϑυσιαστήϱια ϰαὶ ϑεϱαπεύοντες ὥσπεϱ [356c]ἐϰεῖνος ταῖς ἱεϱουϱγίαις. ἔϑυε μὲν γὰϱ Ἁβϱαάμ, ὥσπεϱ ϰαὶ ἡμεῖς, ἀεὶ ϰαὶ συνεχῶς. ἐχϱῆτο δὲ μαντιϰῇ τῇ τῶν διᾳττόντων ἄστϱων: Ἑλληνιϰὸν ἴσως ϰαὶ τοῦτο. οἰωνίζετο δὲ μειζόνως. ἀλλὰ ϰαὶ τὸν ἐπίτϱοπον τῆς οἰϰίας εἶχε συμβολιϰόν. [356d]εἰ δὲ ἀπιστεῖ τις ὑμῶν, αὐτὰ δείξει σαφῶς τὰ ὑπὲϱ τούτων εἰϱημένα Μωυσῇ: „μετὰ δὲ τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα ἐγενήϑη ϰυϱίου λόγος πϱὸς Ἁβϱαὰμ λέγων ἐν ὁϱάματι τῆς νυϰτός: μὴ φοβοῦ, Ἁβϱαάμ, ἐγὼ ὑπεϱασπίζω σου. ὁ μισϑός σου πολὺς ἔσται σφόδϱα. λέγει δὲ Ἁβϱαάμ: δέσποτα, τί μοι δώσεις; ἐγὼ δὲ ἀπολύομαι ἄτεϰνος, ὁ δὲ υἱὸς Μασὲϰ τῆς οἰϰογενοῦς μου ϰληϱονομήσει με. ϰαὶ εὐϑὺς φωνὴ τοῦ ϑεοῦ ἐγένετο πϱὸς αὐτὸν λέγοντος: οὐ ϰληϱονομήσει σε οὗτος, ἀλλ̓ ὃς ἐξελεύσεται“ [356e]„ἐϰ σοῦ, οὗτος ϰληϱονομήσει σε. ἐξήγαγε δὲ αὐτὸν ϰαὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ: ἀνάβλεψον εἰς τὸν οὐϱανὸν ϰαὶ ἀϱίϑμησον τοὺς ἀστέϱας, εἰ δυνήσῃ ἐξαϱιϑμῆσαι αὐτούς. ϰαὶ εἶπεν: οὕτως ἔσται τὸ σπέϱμα σου. ϰαὶ ἐπίστευσεν Ἁβϱαὰμ τῷ ϑεῷ ϰαὶ ἐλογίσϑη αὐτῷ εἰς διϰαιοσύνην.“ Εἴπατε ἐνταῦϑα μοι τοῦ χάϱιν ἐξήγαγεν αὐτὸν ϰαὶ τοὺς ἀστέϱας ἐδείϰνυεν ὁ χϱηματίζων ἄγγελος ἢ ϑεός; οὐ γὰϱ ἐγίνωσϰεν ἔνδον ὤν, ὅσον τι τὸ [357a]πλῆϑός ἐστι τῶν νύϰτωϱ ἀεὶ φαινομένων ϰαὶ μαϱμαϱυσσόντων ἀστέϱων; ἀλλ̓, οἶμαι, δεῖξαι τοὺς διᾴττοντας αὐτῷ βουλόμενος, ἵνα τῶν ῥημάτων ἐναϱγῆ πίστιν παϱάσχηται τὴν πάντα ϰϱαίνουσαν ϰαὶ ἐπιϰυϱοῦσαν οὐϱανοῦ ψῆφον. [358c]ὅπως δὲ μή τις ὑπολάβῃ βίαιον εἶναι τὴν τοιαύτην ἐξήγησιν, ἐφεξῆς ὅσα πϱόσϰειται παϱαϑεὶς αὐτῷ πιστώσομαι. γέγϱαπται γὰϱ ἑξῆς: „Εἶπε δὲ πϱὸς αὐτόν: ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ϑεὸς ὁ ἐξαγαγών σε ἐϰ χώϱας Χαλδαίων, ὥστε δοῦναί σοι τὴν γῆν ταύτην ϰληϱονομῆσαι αὐτήν. εἶπε δέ: δέσποτα ϰύϱιε,“ [358d]„ϰατὰ τί γνώσομαι, ὅτι ϰληϱονομήσω αὐτήν; εἶπε δὲ αὐτῷ: λάβε μοι δάμαλιν τϱιετίζουσαν ϰαὶ αἶγα τϱιετίζουσαν ϰαὶ ϰϱιὸν τϱιετίζοντα ϰαὶ τϱυγόνα ϰαὶ πεϱιστεϱάν. ἔλαβε δὲ αὐτῷ πάντα ταῦτα ϰαὶ διεῖλεν αὐτὰ μέσα: ϰαὶ ἔϑηϰεν αὐτὰ ἀντιπϱόσωπα ἀλλήλοις: τὰ δὲ ὄϱνεα οὐ διεῖλε. ϰατέβη δὲ ὄϱνεα ἐπὶ τὰ διχοτομήματα ϰαὶ συνεϰάϑισεν αὐτοῖς Ἁβϱαάμ.“ Τὴν τοῦ φανέντος ἀγγέλου πϱόϱϱησιν ἤτοι ϑεοῦ διὰ τῆς οἰωνιστιϰῆς ὁϱᾶτε ϰϱατυνομένην, οὐχ, ὥσπεϱ παῤ ὑμῖν, ἐϰ παϱέϱγου, μετὰ ϑυσιῶν [358e]δὲ τῆς μαντείας ἐπιτελουμένης; φησὶ δέ, ὅτι τῇ τῶν οἰωνῶν ἐπιπτήσει βεβαίαν ἔδειξε τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν. ἀποδέχεται δὲ τὴν πίστιν Ἁβϱαὰμ πϱοσεπάγων, ὅτι ἀληϑείας ἄνευ πίστις ἠλιϑιότης ἔοιϰέ τις εἶναι ϰαὶ ἐμβϱοντησία. τὴν δὲ ἀλήϑειαν οὐϰ ἔνεστιν ἰδεῖν ἐϰ ψιλοῦ ῥήματος, ἀλλὰ χϱή τι ϰαὶ παϱαϰολουϑῆσαι τοῖς λόγοις ἐναϱγὲς σημεῖον, ὃ πιστώσεται γενόμενον τὴν εἰς τὸ μέλλον πεποιημένην πϱοαγόϱευσιν... [214] Πϱόφασις ὑμῖν τῆς ἔν γε τούτῳ ῥᾳστώνης πεϱιλέλειπται μία, τὸ μὴ ἐξεῖναι ϑύειν ἔξω γεγονόσι [324a]τῶν Ἱεϱοσολύμων, ϰαίτοι Ἡλίου τεϑυϰότος ἐν τῷ [324c]Καϱμηλίῳ, ϰαὶ οὐϰ ἔν γε τῇ ἁγίᾳ πόλει.

It is, I think, expedient to set forth to all mankind the reasons by which I was convinced that the fabrication of the Galilaeans is a fiction of men composed by wickedness. Though it has in it nothing divine, by making full use of that part of the soul which loves fable and is childish and foolish, it has induced men to believe that the monstrous tale is truth. [41]Now since I intend to treat of all their first dogmas, as they call them, I wish to say in the first place that if my readers desire to try to refute me they must proceed as if they were in a court of law and not drag in irrelevant matter, or, as the saying is, bring counter-charges until they have defended their own views. [42]For thus it will be better and clearer if, when they wish to censure any views of mine, they undertake that as a separate task, but when they are defending themselves against my censure, they bring no counter-charges.
  It is worth while to recall in a few words whence and how we first arrived at a conception of God; next to compare what is said about the divine among the Hellenes and Hebrews; and finally to enquire of those who are neither Hellenes nor Jews, but belong to the sect of the Galilaeans, why they preferred the belief of the Jews to ours; and what, further, can be the reason why they do not even adhere to the Jewish beliefs but have abandoned them also and followed a way of their own. For they have not accepted a single admirable or important doctrine of those that are held either by us Hellenes or by the Hebrews who derived them from Moses; but from both religions they have gathered what has been engrafted like powers of evil, as it were, on these nations – [43]atheism from the Jewish levity, and a sordid and slovenly way of living from our indolence and vulgarity; and they desire that this should be called the noblest worship of the gods.
  [52]Now that the human race possesses its knowledge of God by nature and not from teaching is proved to us first of all by the universal yearning for the divine that is in all men whether private persons or communities, whether considered as individuals or as races. For all of us, without being taught, have attained to a belief in some sort of divinity, though it is not easy for all men to know the precise truth about it, nor is it possible for those who do know it to tell it to all men. ... Surely, besides this conception which is common to all men, there is another also. I mean that we are all by nature so closely dependent on the heavens and the gods that are visible therein, that even if any man conceives of another god besides these, he in every case assigns to him the heavens as his dwelling-place; not that he thereby separates him from the earth, but he so to speak establishes the King of the All in the heavens as in the most honourable place of all, and conceives of him as overseeing from there the affairs of this world.
  [69]What need have I to summon Hellenes and Hebrews as witnesses of this? There exists no man who does not stretch out his hands towards the heavens when he prays; and whether he swears by one god or several, if he has any notion at all of the divine, he turns heavenward. And it was very natural that men should feel thus. For since they observed that in what concerns the heavenly bodies there is no increase or diminution or mutability, and that they do not suffer any unregulated influence, but their movement is harmonious and their arrangement in concert; and that the illuminations of the moon are regulated, and that the risings and settings of the sun are regularly defined, and always at regularly defined seasons, they naturally conceived that the heaven is a god and the throne of a god. For a being of that sort, since it is not subject to increase by addition, or to diminution by subtraction, and is stationed beyond all change due to alteration and mutability, is free from decay and generation, and inasmuch as it is immortal by nature and indestructible, it is pure from every sort of stain. Eternal and ever in movement, as we see, it travels in a circuit about the great Creator, whether it be impelled by a nobler and more divine soul that dwells therein, just as, I mean, our bodies are by the soul in us, or having received its motion from God Himself, it wheels in its boundless circuit, in an unceasing and eternal career.
  [44]Now it is true that the Hellenes invented their myths about the gods, incredible and monstrous stories. For they said that Kronos swallowed his children and then vomited them forth; and they even told of lawless unions, how Zeus had intercourse with his mother, and after having a child by her, married his own daughter, or rather did not even marry her, but simply had intercourse with her and then handed her over to another. [75]Then too there is the legend that Dionysus was rent asunder and his limbs joined together again. This is the sort of thing described in the myths of the Hellenes. Compare with them the Jewish doctrine, how the garden was planted by God and Adam was fashioned by Him, and next, for Adam, woman came to be. For God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone. Let us make him an help meet like, him.” Yet so far was she from helping him at all that she deceived him, and was in part the cause of his and her own fall from their life of ease in the garden.
  This is wholly fabulous. For is it probable that God did not know that the being he was creating as a help meet would prove to be not so much a blessing as a misfortune to him who received her? [86]Again, what sort of language are we to say that the serpent used when he talked with Eve? Was it the language of human beings? And in what do such legends as these differ from the myths that were invented by the Hellenes? [89]Moreover, is it not excessively strange that God should deny to the human beings whom he had fashioned the power to distinguish between good and evil? What could be more foolish than a being unable to distinguish good from bad? For it is evident that he would not avoid the latter, I mean things evil, nor would he strive after the former, I mean things good. And, in short, God refused to let man taste of wisdom, than which there could be nothing of more value for man. For that the power to distinguish between good and less good is the property of wisdom is evident surely even to the witless; [93]so that the serpent was a benefactor rather than a destroyer of the human race. Furthermore, their God must be called envious. For when he saw that man had attained to a share of wisdom, that he might not, God said, taste of the tree of life, he cast him out of the garden, saying in so many words, “Behold, Adam has become as one of us, because he knows good from bad; and now let him not put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat and thus live forever.” [94]Accordingly, unless every one of these legends is a myth that involves some secret interpretation, as I indeed believe, they are filled with many blasphemous sayings about God. For in the first place to be ignorant that she who was created as a help meet would be the cause of the fall; secondly to refuse the knowledge of good and bad, which knowledge alone seems to give coherence to the mind of man; and lastly to be jealous lest man should take of the tree of life and from mortal become immortal, – this is to be grudging and envious overmuch.
  [96]Next to consider the views that are correctly held by the Jews, and also those that our fathers handed down to us from the beginning. Our account has in it the immediate creator of this universe, as the following shows.... Moses indeed has said nothing whatsoever about the gods who are superior to this creator, nay, he has not even ventured to say anything about the nature of the angels. But that they serve God he has asserted in many ways and often; but whether they were generated or un-generated, or whether they were generated by one god and appointed to serve another, or in some other way, he has nowhere said definitely. But he describes fully in what manner the heavens and the earth and all that therein is were set in order. In part, he says, God ordered them to be, such as light and the firmament, and in part, he says, God made them, such as the heavens and the earth, the sun and moon, and that all things which already existed but were hidden away for the time being, he separated, such as water, I mean, and dry land. But apart from these he did not venture to say a word about the generation or the making of the Spirit, but only this, “And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.” But whether that spirit was ungenerated or had been generated he does not make at all clear.
  [49]Now, if you please, we will compare the utterance of Plato. Observe then what he says about the creator, and what words he makes him speak at the time of the generation of the universe, in order that we may compare Plato’s account of that generation with that of Moses. For in this way it will appear who was the nobler and who was more worthy of intercourse with God, Plato who paid homage to images, or he of whom the Scripture says that God spake with him mouth to mouth. “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was invisible and without form, and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light; and there was light. And God saw the light that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters. And God called the firmament Heaven. And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear; and it was so. And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass for fodder, and the fruit tree yielding fruit. And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven that they may be for a light upon the earth. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to rule over the day and over the night.”
  In all this, you observe, Moses does not say that the deep was created by God, or the darkness or the waters. And yet, after saying concerning light that God ordered it to be, and it was, surely he ought to have gone on to speak of night also, and the deep and the waters. But of them he says not a word to imply that they were not already existing at all, though he often mentions them. Furthermore, he does not mention the birth or creation of the angels or in what manner they were brought into being, but deals only with the heavenly and earthly bodies. It follows that, according to Moses, God is the creator of nothing that is incorporeal, but is only the disposer of matter that already existed. For the words, “And the earth was invisible and without form” can only mean that he regards the wet and dry substance as the original matter and that he introduces God as the disposer of this matter.
  [57]Now on the other hand hear what Plato says about the universe: “Now the whole heaven or the universe, – or whatever other name would be most acceptable to it, so let it be named by us, – did it exist eternally, having no beginning of generation, or has it come into being starting from some beginning? It has come into being. For it can be seen and handled and has a body; and all such things are the objects of sensation, and such objects of sensation, being apprehensible by opinion with the aid of sensation are things that came into being, as we saw, and have been generated... It follows, therefore, according to the reasonable theory, that we ought to affirm that this universe came into being as a living creature possessing soul and intelligence in very truth, both by the providence of God.”
  Let us but compare them, point by point. What and what sort of speech does the god make in the account of Moses, and what the god in the account of Plato?
  [58]“And God said, Let us make man in our image, and our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them, and said, Be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over all the cattle and over all the earth.”
  Now, I say, hear also the speech which Plato puts in the mouth of the Artificer of the All.
  “Gods of Gods! Those works whose artificer and father I am will abide indissoluble, so long as it is my will. Lo, all that hath been fastened may be loosed, yet to will to loose that which is harmonious and in good case were the act of an evil being. Wherefore, since ye have come into being, ye are not immortal or indissoluble altogether, nevertheless ye shall by no means be loosed or meet with the doom of death, since ye have found in my will a bond more mighty and more potent than those wherewith ye were bound when ye came into being. Now therefore hearken to the saying which I proclaim unto you: Three kinds of mortal beings still remain unborn, and unless these have birth the heaven will be incomplete. For it will not have within itself all the kinds of living things. Yet if these should come into being and receive a share of life at my hands they would become equal to gods. Therefore in order that they may be mortal, and that this All may be All in very truth, turn ye according to your nature to the contriving of living things, imitating my power even as I showed it in generating you. And such part of them as is fitted to receive the same name as the immortals, which is called divine and the power in them that governs all who are willing ever to follow justice and you, this part I, having sowed it and originated the same, will deliver to you. For the rest, do you, weaving the mortal with the immortal, contrive living beings and bring them to birth; then by giving them sustenance increase them, and when they perish receive them back again.”
  [65]But since ye are about to consider whether this is only a dream, do ye learn the meaning thereof. Plato gives the name gods to those that are visible, the sun and moon, the stars and the heavens, but these are only the likenesses of the invisible gods. The sun which is visible to our eyes is the likeness of the intelligible and invisible sun, and again the moon which is visible to our eyes and every one of the stars are likenesses of the intelligible. Accordingly Plato knows of those intelligible and invisible gods which are immanent in and coexist with the creator himself and were begotten and proceeded from him. Naturally, therefore, the creator in Plato’s account says “gods” when he is addressing the invisible beings, and “of gods,” meaning by this, evidently, the visible gods. And the common creator of both these is he who fashioned the heavens and the earth and the sea and the stars, and begat in the intelligible world the archetypes of these.
  Observe then that what follows is well said also. “For,” he says, “there remain three kinds of mortal things,” meaning, evidently, human beings, animals and plants; for each one of these has been denned by its own peculiar definition. “Now,” he goes on to say, “if each one of these also should come to exist by me, it would of necessity become immortal.” And indeed, in the case of the intelligible gods and the visible universe, no other cause for their immortality exists than that they came into existence by the act of the creator. When, therefore, he says, “Such part of them as is immortal must needs be given to these by the creator,” he means the reasoning soul. “For the rest,” he says, “do ye weave mortal with immortal.” It is therefore clear that the creative gods received from their father their creative power and so begat on earth all living things that are mortal. For if there were to be no difference between the heavens and mankind and animals too, by Zeus, and all the way down to the very tribe of creeping things and the little fish that swim in the sea, then there would have had to be one and the same creator for them all. But if there is a great gulf fixed between immortals and mortals, [66]and this cannot become greater by addition or less by subtraction, nor can it be mixed with what is mortal and subject to fate, it follows that one set of gods were the creative cause of mortals, and another of immortals.
  Accordingly, since Moses, as it seems, has failed also to give a complete account of the immediate creator of this universe, [99]let us go on and set one against another the opinion of the Hebrews and that of our fathers about these nations.
  Moses says that the creator of the universe chose out the Hebrew nation, that to that nation alone did he pay heed and cared for it, and he gives him charge of it alone. But how and by what sort of gods the other nations are governed he has said not a word, – unless indeed one should concede that he did assign to them the sun and moon. However of this I shall speak a little later. Now I will only point out that Moses himself and the prophets who came after him and Jesus the Nazarene, yes and Paul also, who surpassed all the magicians and charlatans of every place and every time, [100]assert that he is the God of Israel alone and of Judaea, and that the Jews are his chosen people. Listen to their own words, and first to the words of Moses: “And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Israel is my son, my firstborn. And I have said to thee, Let my people go that they may serve me. But thou didst refuse to let them go.” And a little later, “And they say unto him, The God of the Hebrews hath summoned us; we will go therefore three days“ journey into the desert, that we may sacrifice unto the Lord our God.” And soon he speaks again in the same way, “The Lord the God of the Hebrews hath sent me unto thee, saying, Let my people go that they may serve me in the wilderness.”
  [106]But that from the beginning God cared only for the Jews and that He chose them out as his portion, has been clearly asserted not only by Moses and Jesus but by Paul as well; though in Paul’s case this is strange. For according to circumstances he keeps changing his views about God, as the polypus changes its colours to match the rocks, and now he insists that the Jews alone are God’s portion, and then again, when he is trying to persuade the Hellenes to take sides with him, he says: “Do not think that he is the God of Jews only, but also of Gentiles: yea of Gentiles also.” Therefore it is fair to ask of Paul why God, if he was not the God of the Jews only but also of the Gentiles, sent the blessed gift of prophecy to the Jews in abundance and gave them Moses and the oil of anointing, and the prophets and the law and the incredible and monstrous elements in their myths? For you hear them crying aloud: “Man did eat angels’ food.” And finally God sent unto them Jesus also, but unto us no prophet, no oil of anointing, no teacher, no herald to announce his love for man which should one day, though late, reach even unto us also. Nay he even looked on for myriads, or if you prefer, for thousands of years, while men in extreme ignorance served idols, as you call them, from where the sun rises to where he sets, yes and from North to South, save only that little tribe which less than two thousand years before had settled in one part of Palestine. For if he is the God of all of us alike, and the creator of all, why did he neglect us? [100]Wherefore it is natural to think that the God of the Hebrews was not the begetter of the whole universe with lordship over the whole, but rather, as I said before, that he is confined within limits, and that since his empire has bounds we must conceive of him as only one of the crowd of other gods. [106]Then are we to pay further heed to you because you or one of your stock imagined the God of the universe, though in any case you attained only to a bare conception of Him? Is not all this partiality? God, you say, is a jealous God. But why is he so jealous, even avenging the sins of the fathers on the children?
  [115]But now consider our teaching in comparison with this of yours. Our writers say that the creator is the common father and king of all things, but that the other functions have been assigned by him to national gods of the peoples and gods that protect the cities; every one of whom administers his own department in accordance with his own nature. For since in the father all things are complete and all things are one, while in the separate deities one quality or another predominates, therefore Ares rules over the warlike nations, Athene over those that are wise as well as warlike, Hermes over those that are more shrewd than adventurous; and in short the nations over which the gods preside follow each the essential character of their proper god. Now if experience does not bear witness to the truth of our teachings, let us grant that our traditions are a figment and a misplaced attempt to convince, [116]and then we ought to approve the doctrines held by you. If, however, quite the contrary is true, and from the remotest past experience bears witness to our account and in no case does anything appear to harmonise with your teachings, why do you persist in maintaining a pretension so enormous?
  Come, tell me why it is that the Celts and the Germans are fierce, while the Hellenes and Romans are, generally speaking, inclined to political life and humane, though at the same time unyielding and warlike? Why the Egyptians are more intelligent and more given to crafts, and the Syrians unwarlike and effeminate, but at the same time intelligent, hot-tempered, vain and quick to learn? For if there is anyone who does not discern a reason for these differences among the nations, but rather declaims that all this so befell spontaneously, how, I ask, can he still believe that the universe is administered by a providence? But if there is any man who maintains that there are reasons for these differences, let him tell me them, in the name of the creator himself, and instruct me. [131]As for men’s laws, it is evident that men have established them to correspond with their own natural dispositions; that is to say, constitutional and humane laws were established by those in whom a humane disposition had been fostered above all else, savage and inhuman laws by those in whom there lurked and was inherent the contrary disposition. For lawgivers have succeeded in adding but little by their discipline to the natural characters and aptitudes of men. Accordingly the Scythians would not receive Anacharsis among them when he was inspired by a religious frenzy, and with very few exceptions you will not find that any men of the Western nations have any great inclination for philosophy or geometry or studies of that sort, although the Roman Empire has now so long been paramount. But those who are unusually talented delight only in debate and the art of rhetoric, and do not adopt any other study; so strong, it seems, is the force of nature. Whence then come these differences of character and laws among the nations?
  [134]Now of the dissimilarity of language Moses has given a wholly fabulous explanation. For he said that the sons of men came together intending to build a city, and a great tower therein, but that God said that he must go down and confound their languages. And that no one may think I am falsely accusing him of this, I will read from the book of Moses what follows: “And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, before we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth. And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men had builded. And the Lord said, Behold, the people is one, [135]and they have all one language; and this they have begun to do; and now nothing will be withholden from them which they purpose to do. Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that no man may understand the speech of his neighbour. So the Lord God scattered them abroad upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city and the tower.” And then you demand that we should believe this account, while you yourselves disbelieve Homer’s narrative of the Aloadae, namely that they planned to set three mountains one on another, “that so the heavens might be scaled.” For my part I say that this tale is almost as fabulous as the other. But if you accept the former, why in the name of the gods do you discredit Homer’s fable? For I suppose that to men so ignorant as you I must say nothing about the fact that, even if all men throughout the inhabited world ever employ one speech and one language, they will not be able to build a tower that will reach to the heavens, even though they should turn the whole earth into bricks. For such a tower will need countless bricks each one as large as the whole earth, if they are to succeed in reaching to the orbit of the moon. For let us assume that all mankind met together, employing but one language and speech, and that they made the whole earth into bricks and hewed out stones, when would it reach as high as the heavens, even though they spun it out and stretched it till it was finer than a thread? Then do you, who believe that this so obvious fable is true, and moreover think that God was afraid of the brutal violence of men, and for this reason came down to earth to confound their languages, do you, I say, still venture to boast of your knowledge of God?
  [137]But I will go back again to the question how God confounded their languages. The reason why he did so Moses has declared: namely, that God was afraid that if they should have one language and were of one mind, they would first construct for themselves a path to the heavens [138]and then do some mischief against him. But how he carried this out Moses does not say at all, but only that he first came down from heaven, – because he could not, as it seems, do it from on high, without coming down to earth. But with respect to the existing differences in characters and customs, neither Moses nor anyone else has enlightened us. And yet among mankind the difference between the customs and the political constitutions of the nations is in every way greater than the difference in their language. What Hellene, for instance, ever tells us that a man ought to marry his sister or his daughter or his mother? Yet in Persia this is accounted virtuous. But why need I go over their several characteristics, or describe the love of liberty and lack of discipline of the Germans, the docility and tameness of the Syrians, the Persians, the Parthians, and in short of all the barbarians in the East and the South, and of all nations who possess and are contented with a somewhat despotic form of government? Now if these differences that are greater and more important came about without the aid of a greater and more divine providence, why do we vainly trouble ourselves about and worship one who takes no thought for us? For is it fitting that he who cared nothing for our lives, our characters, our manners, our good government, our political constitution, should still claim to receive honour at our hands? Certainly not. You see to what an absurdity your doctrine comes. For of all the blessings that we behold in the life of man, those that relate to the soul come first, and those that relate to the body are secondary. If, therefore, he paid no heed to our spiritual blessings, neither took thought for our physical conditions, and moreover, did not send to us teachers or lawgivers as he did for the Hebrews, such as Moses and the prophets who followed him, for what shall we properly feel gratitude to him?
  [141]But consider whether God has not given to us also gods and kindly guardians of whom you have no knowledge, gods in no way inferior to him who from the beginning has been held in honour among the Hebrews of Judaea, the only land that he chose to take thought for, as Moses declared and those who came after him, down to our own time. But even if he who is honoured among the Hebrews really was the immediate creator of the universe, our beliefs about him are higher than theirs, and he has bestowed on us greater blessings than on them, with respect both to the soul and to externals. Of these, however, I shall speak a little later. Moreover, he sent to us also lawgivers not inferior to Moses, if indeed many of them were not far superior.
  [143]Therefore, as I said, unless for every nation separately some presiding national god (and under him an angel, a demon, a hero, and a peculiar order of spirits which obey and work for the higher powers) established the differences in our laws and characters, you must demonstrate to me how these differences arose by some other agency. Moreover, it is not sufficient to say, “God spake and it was so.” For the natures of things that are created ought to harmonise with the commands of God. I will say more clearly what I mean. Did God ordain that fire should mount upwards by chance and earth sink down? Was it not necessary, in order that the ordinance of God should be fulfilled, for the former to be light and the latter to weigh heavy? And in the case of other things also this is equally true.... Likewise with respect to things divine. But the reason is that the race of men is doomed to death and perishable. Therefore men’s works also are naturally perishable and mutable and subject to every kind of alteration. But since God is eternal, it follows that of such sort are his ordinances also. And since they are such, they are either the natures of things or are accordant with the nature of things. For how could nature be at variance with the ordinance of God? How could it fall out of harmony therewith? Therefore, if he did ordain that even as our languages are confounded and do not harmonise with one another, so too should it be with the political constitutions of the nations, then it was not by a special, isolated decree that he gave these constitutions their essential characteristics, or framed us also to match this lack of agreement. For different natures must first have existed in all those things that among the nations were to be differentiated. This at any rate is seen if one observes how very different in their bodies are the Germans and Scythians from the Libyans and Ethiopians. Can this also be due to a bare decree, and does not the climate or the country have a joint influence with the gods in determining what sort of complexion they have?
  [146]Furthermore, Moses also consciously drew a veil over this sort of enquiry, and did not assign the confusion of dialects to God alone. For he says that God did not descend alone, but that there descended with him not one but several, and he did not say who these were. But it is evident that he assumed that the beings who descended with God resembled him. If, therefore, it was not the Lord alone but his associates with him who descended for the purpose of confounding the dialects, it is very evident that for the confusion of men’s characters, also, not the Lord alone but also those who together with him confounded the dialects would reasonably be considered responsible for this division.
  [148]Now why have I discussed this matter at such length, though it was my intention to speak briefly? For this reason: If the immediate creator of the universe be he who is proclaimed by Moses, then we hold nobler beliefs concerning him, inasmuch as we consider him to be the master of all things in general, but that there are besides national gods who are subordinate to him and are like viceroys of a king, each administering separately his own province; and, moreover, we do not make him the sectional rival of the gods whose station is subordinate to his. But if Moses first pays honour to a sectional god, and then makes the lordship of the whole universe contrast with his power, then it is better to believe as we do, and to recognise the God of the All, though not without apprehending also the God of Moses; this is better, I say, than to honour one who has been assigned the lordship over a very small portion, instead of the creator of all things.
  [152]That is a surprising law of Moses, I mean the famous decalogue! “Thou shalt not steal.” “Thou shalt not kill.” “Thou shalt not bear false witness.” But let me write out word for word every one of the commandments which he says were written by God himself.
  “I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt.” Then follows the second: “Thou shalt have no other gods but me.” “Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image.” And then he adds the reason: “For I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third generation.” “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.” “Remember the sabbath day.” “Honour thy father and thy mother.” “Thou shalt not commit adultery.” “Thou shalt not kill.” “Thou shalt not steal.” “Thou shalt not bear false witness.” “Thou shalt not covet anything that is thy neighbour’s.”
  Now except for the command “Thou shalt not worship other gods,” and “Remember the sabbath day,” what nation is there, I ask in the name of the gods, which does not think that it ought to keep the other commandments? So much so that penalties have been ordained against those who transgress them, sometimes more severe, and sometimes similar to those enacted by Moses, though they are sometimes more humane.
  [155]But as for the commandment “Thou shalt not worship other gods,” to this surely he adds a terrible libel upon God. “For I am a jealous God,” he says, and in another place again, “Our God is a consuming fire.” Then if a man is jealous and envious you think him blameworthy, whereas if God is called jealous you think it a divine quality? And yet how is it reasonable to speak falsely of God in a matter that is so evident? For if he is indeed jealous, then against his will are all other gods worshipped, and against his will do all the remaining nations worship their gods. Then how is it that he did not himself restrain them, if he is so jealous and does not wish that the others should be worshipped, but only himself? Can it be that he was not able to do so, or did he not wish even from the beginning to prevent the other gods also from being worshipped? However, the first explanation is impious, to say, I mean, that he was unable; and the second is in accordance with what we do ourselves. Lay aside this nonsense and do not draw down on yourselves such terrible blasphemy. For if it is God’s will that none other should be worshipped, why do you worship this spurious son of his whom he has never yet recognised or considered as his own? This I shall easily prove. You, however, I know not why, foist on him a counterfeit son....
  [160]Nowhere is God shown as angry, or resentful, or wroth, or taking an oath, or inclining first to this side, then suddenly to that, or as turned from his purpose, as Moses tells us happened in the case of Phinehas. If any of you has read the Book of Numbers he knows what I mean. For when Phinehas had seized with his own hand and slain the man who had dedicated himself to Baal-peor, and with him the woman who had persuaded him, striking her with a shameful and most painful wound through the belly, as Moses tells us, then God is made to say: “Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest, hath turned my wrath away from the children of Israel, in that he was jealous with my jealousy among them; and I consumed not the children of Israel in my jealousy.” What could be more trivial than the reason for which God was falsely represented as angry by the writer of this passage? [161]What could be more irrational, even if ten or fifteen persons, or even, let us suppose, a hundred, for they certainly will not say that there were a thousand, – however, let us assume that even as many persons as that ventured to transgress some one of the laws laid down by God; was it right that on account of this one thousand, six hundred thousand should be utterly destroyed? For my part I think it would be better in every way to preserve one bad man along with a thousand virtuous men than to destroy the thousand together with that one....
  For if the anger of even one hero or unimportant demon is hard to bear for whole countries and cities, who could have endured the wrath of so mighty a God, whether it were directed against demons or angels or mankind? [168]It is worth while to compare his behaviour with the mildness of Lycurgus and the forbearance of Solon, or the kindness and benevolence of the Romans towards transgressors. [171]But observe also from what follows how far superior are our teachings to theirs. The philosophers bid us imitate the gods so far as we can, and they teach us that this imitation consists in the contemplation of realities. And that this sort of study is remote from passion and is indeed based on freedom from passion, is, I suppose, evident, even without my saying it. In proportion then as we, having been assigned to the contemplation of realities, attain to freedom from passion, in so far do we become like God. But what sort of imitation of God is praised among the Hebrews? Anger and wrath and fierce jealousy. For God says: “Phinehas hath turned away my wrath from the children of Israel, in that he was jealous with my jealousy among them.” For God, on finding one who shared his resentment and his grief, thereupon, as it appears, laid aside his resentment. [172]These words and others like them about God Moses is frequently made to utter in the Scripture.
  [176]Furthermore observe from what follows that God did not take thought for the Hebrews alone, but though he cared for all nations, he bestowed on the Hebrews nothing considerable or of great value, whereas on us he bestowed gifts far higher and surpassing theirs. For instance the Egyptians, as they reckon up the names of not a few wise men among themselves, can boast that they possess many successors of Hermes, I mean of Hermes who in his third manifestation visited Egypt; while the Chaldaeans and Assyrians can boast of the successors of Oannes and Belos; the Hellenes can boast of countless successors of Cheiron. For thenceforth all Hellenes were born with an aptitude for the mysteries and theologians, in the very way, you observe, which the Hebrews claim as their own peculiar boast....
  [178]But has God granted to you to originate any science or any philosophical study? Why, what is it? For the theory of the heavenly bodies was perfected among the Hellenes, after the first observations had been made among the barbarians in Babylon. And the study of geometry took its rise in the measurement of the land in Egypt, and from this grew to its present importance. Arithmetic began with the Phoenician merchants, and among the Hellenes in course of time acquired the aspect of a regular science. These three the Hellenes combined with music into one science, for they connected astronomy with geometry and adapted arithmetic to both, and perceived the principle of harmony in it. Hence they laid down the rules for their music, since they had discovered for the laws of harmony with reference to the sense of hearing an agreement that was infallible, or something very near to it.
  [184]Need I tell over their names man by man, or under their professions? I mean, either the individual men, as for instance Plato, Socrates, Aristeides, Cimon, Thales, Lycurgus, Agesilaus, Archidamus, – or should I rather speak of the class of philosophers, of generals, of artificers, of lawgivers? For it will be found that even the most wicked and most brutal of the generals behaved more mildly to the greatest offenders than Moses did to those who had done no wrong. And now of what monarchy shall I report to you? [190]Shall it be that of Perseus, or Aeacus, or Minos of Crete, who purified the sea of pirates, and expelled and drove out the barbarians as far as Syria and Sicily, advancing in both directions the frontiers of his realm, and ruled not only over the islands but also over the dwellers along the coasts? And dividing with his brother Rhadamanthus, not indeed the earth, but the care of mankind, he himself laid down the laws as he received them from Zeus, but left to Rhadamanthus to fill the part of judge....
  [193]But when after her foundation many wars encompassed her, she won and prevailed in them all; and since she ever increased in size in proportion to her very dangers and needed greater security, then Zeus set over her the great philosopher Numa. This then was the excellent and upright Numa who dwelt in deserted groves and ever communed with the gods in the pure thoughts of his own heart.... It was he who established most of the laws concerning temple worship. [194]Now these blessings, derived from a divine possession and inspiration which proceeded both from the Sibyl and others who at that time uttered oracles in their native tongue, were manifestly bestowed on the city by Zeus. And the shield which fell from the clouds and the head which appeared on the hill, from which, I suppose, the seat of mighty Zeus received its name, are we to reckon these among the very highest or among secondary gifts? And yet, ye misguided men, though there is preserved among us that weapon which flew down from heaven, which mighty Zeus or father Ares sent down to give us a warrant, not in word but in deed, that he will forever hold his shield before our city, you have ceased to adore and reverence it, but you adore the wood of the cross and draw its likeness on your foreheads and engrave it on your housefronts.
  Would not any man be justified in detesting the more intelligent among you, or pitying the more foolish, who, by following you, have sunk to such depths of ruin that they have abandoned the ever-living gods and have gone over to the corpse of the Jew.... [197]For I say nothing about the Mysteries of the Mother of the Gods, and I admire Marius.... [198]For the spirit that comes to men from the gods is present but seldom and in few, and it is not easy for every man to share in it or at every time. Thus it is that the prophetic spirit has ceased among the Hebrews also, nor is it maintained among the Egyptians, either, down to the present. And we see that the indigenous oracles of Greece have also fallen silent and yielded to the course of time. Then lo, our gracious lord and father Zeus took thought of this, and that we might not be wholly deprived of communion with the gods has granted us through the sacred arts a means of enquiry by which we may obtain the aid that suffices for our needs.
  [200]I had almost forgotten the greatest of the gifts of Helios and Zeus. But naturally I kept it for the last. And indeed it is not peculiar to us Romans only, but we share it, I think, with the Hellenes our kinsmen. I mean to say that Zeus engendered Asclepius from himself among the intelligible gods, and through the life of generative Helios he revealed him to the earth. Asclepius, having made his visitation to earth from the sky, appeared at Epidaurus singly, in the shape of a man; but afterwards he multiplied himself, and by his visitations stretched out over the whole earth his saving right hand. He came to Pergamon, to Ionia, to Tarentum afterwards; and later he came to Rome. And he travelled to Cos and thence to Aegae. Next he is present everywhere on land and sea. He visits no one of us separately, and yet he raises up souls that are sinful and bodies that are sick.
  [201]But what great gift of this sort do the Hebrews boast of as bestowed on them by God, the Hebrews who have persuaded you to desert to them? If you had at any rate paid heed to their teachings, you would not have fared altogether ill, and though worse than you did before, when you were with us, still your condition would have been bearable and supportable. For you would be worshipping one god instead of many, not a man, or rather many wretched men. [202]And though you would be following a law that is harsh and stern and contains much that is savage and barbarous, instead of our mild and humane laws, and would in other respects be inferior to us, yet you would be more holy and purer than now in your forms of worship. But now it has come to pass that like leeches you have sucked the worst blood from that source and left the purer. [191]Yet Jesus, who won over the least worthy of you, has been known by name for but little more than three hundred years: and during his lifetime he accomplished nothing worth hearing of, unless anyone thinks that to heal crooked and blind men and to exorcise those who were possessed by evil demons in the villages of Bethsaida and Bethany can be classed as a mighty achievement. [205]As for purity of life you do not know whether he so much as mentioned it; but you emulate the rages and the bitterness of the Jews, overturning temples and altars, [206]and you slaughtered not only those of us who remained true to the teachings of their fathers, but also men who were as much astray as yourselves, heretics, because they did not wail over the corpse in the same fashion as yourselves. But these are rather your own doings; for nowhere did either Jesus or Paul hand down to you such commands. The reason for this is that they never even hoped that you would one day attain to such power as you have; for they were content if they could delude maidservants and slaves, and through them the women, and men like Cornelius and Sergius. But if you can show me that one of these men is mentioned by the well-known writers of that time, – these events happened in the reign of Tiberius or Claudius, – then you may consider that I speak falsely about all matters.
  [209]But I know not whence I was as it were inspired to utter these remarks. However, to return to the point at which I digressed, when I asked, “Why were you so ungrateful to our gods as to desert them for the Jews?” Was it because the gods granted the sovereign power to Rome, permitting the Jews to be free for a short time only, and then forever to be enslaved and aliens? Look at Abraham: was he not an alien in a strange land? And Jacob: was he not a slave, first in Syria, then after that in Palestine, and in his old age in Egypt? Does not Moses say that he led them forth from the house of bondage out of Egypt “with a stretched out arm”? And after their sojourn in Palestine did they not change their fortunes more frequently than observers say the chameleon changes its colour, now subject to the judges, now enslaved to foreign races? And when they began to be governed by kings, – but let me for the present postpone asking how they were governed: for as the Scripture tells us, God did not willingly allow them to have kings, but only when constrained by them, [210]and after protesting to them beforehand that they would thus be governed ill, – still they did at any rate inhabit their own country and tilled it for a little over three hundred years. After that they were enslaved first to the Assyrians, then to the Medes, later to the Persians, and now at last to ourselves. [213]Even Jesus, who was proclaimed among you, was one of Caesar’s subjects. And if you do not believe me I will prove it a little later, or rather let me simply assert it now. However, you admit that with his father and mother he registered his name in the governorship of Cyrenius.
  But when he became man what benefits did he confer on his own kinsfolk? Nay, the Galilaeans answer, they refused to hearken unto Jesus. What? How was it then that this hardhearted and stubborn-necked people hearkened unto Moses; but Jesus, who commanded the spirits and walked on the sea, and drove out demons, and as you yourselves assert made the heavens and the earth, – for no one of his disciples ventured to say this concerning him, save only John, and he did not say it clearly or distinctly; still let us at any rate admit that he said it – could not this Jesus change the dispositions of his own friends and kinsfolk to the end that he might save them?
  [218]However, I will consider this again a little later when I begin to examine particularly into the miracle-working and the fabrication of the gospels. But now answer me this. Is it better to be free continuously and during two thousand whole years to rule over the greater part of the earth and the sea, or to be enslaved and to live in obedience to the will of others? No man is so lacking in self-respect as to choose the latter by preference. Again, will anyone think that victory in war is less desirable than defeat? Who is so stupid? But if this that I assert is the truth, point out to me among the Hebrews a single general like Alexander or Caesar! You have no such man. And indeed, by the gods, I am well aware that I am insulting these heroes by the question, but I mentioned them because they are well known. For the generals who are inferior to them are unknown to the multitude, and yet every one of them deserves more admiration than all the generals put together whom the Jews have had.
  [221]Further, as regards the constitution of the state and the fashion of the law-courts, the administration of cities and the excellence of the laws, progress in learning and the cultivation of the liberal arts, were not all these things in a miserable and barbarous state among the Hebrews? [222]And yet the wretched Eusebius will have it that poems in hexameters are to be found even among them, and sets up a claim that the study of logic exists among the Hebrews, since he has heard among the Hellenes the word they use for logic. What kind of healing art has ever appeared among the Hebrews, like that of Hippocrates among the Hellenes, and of certain other schools that came after him? [224]Is their “wisest” man Solomon at all comparable with Phocylides or Theognis or Isocrates among the Hellenes? Certainly not. At least, if one were to compare the exhortations of Isocrates with Solomon’s proverbs, you would, I am very sure, find that the son of Theodoras is superior to their “wisest” king. “But,” they answer, “Solomon was also proficient in the secret cult of God.” What then? Did not this Solomon serve our gods also, deluded by his wife, as they assert? What great virtue! What wealth of wisdom! He could not rise superior to pleasure, and the arguments of a woman led him astray! Then if he was deluded by a woman, do not call this man wise. But if you are convinced that he was wise, do not believe that he was deluded by a woman, but that, trusting to his own judgement and intelligence and the teaching that he received from the God who had been revealed to him, he served the other gods also. For envy and jealousy do not come even near the most virtuous men, much more are they remote from angels and gods. But you concern yourselves with incomplete and partial powers, which if anyone call daemonic he does not err. For in them are pride and vanity, but in the gods there is nothing of the sort.
  [229]If the reading of your own scriptures is sufficient for you, why do you nibble at the learning of the Hellenes? And yet it were better to keep men away from that learning than from the eating of sacrificial meat. For by that, as even Paul says, he who eats thereof is not harmed, but the conscience of the brother who sees him might be offended according to you, O most wise and arrogant men! But this learning of ours has caused every noble being that nature has produced among you to abandon impiety. Accordingly everyone who possessed even a small fraction of innate virtue has speedily abandoned your impiety. It were therefore better for you to keep men from learning rather than from sacrificial meats. But you yourselves know, it seems to me, the very different effect on the intelligence of your writings as compared with ours; and that from studying yours no man could attain to excellence or even to ordinary goodness, whereas from studying ours every man would become better than before, even though he were altogether without natural fitness. But when a man is naturally well endowed, and moreover receives the education of our literature, he becomes actually a gift of the gods to mankind, either by kindling the light of knowledge, or by founding some kind of political constitution, or by routing numbers of his country’s foes, or even by travelling far over the earth and far by sea, and thus proving himself a man of heroic mould...
  Now this would be a clear proof: Choose out children from among you all and train and educate them in your scriptures, [230]and if when they come to manhood they prove to have nobler qualities than slaves, then you may believe that I am talking nonsense and am suffering from spleen. Yet you are so misguided and foolish that you regard those chronicles of yours as divinely inspired, though by their help no man could ever become wiser or braver or better than he was before; while, on the other hand, writings by whose aid men can acquire courage, wisdom and justice, these you ascribe to Satan and to those who serve Satan!
  [235]Asclepius heals our bodies, and the Muses with the aid of Asclepius and Apollo and Hermes, the god of eloquence, train our souls; Ares fights for us in war and Enyo also; Hephaistus apportions and administers the crafts, and Athene the Motherless Maiden with the aid of Zeus presides over them all. Consider therefore whether we are not superior to you in every single one of these things, I mean in the arts and in wisdom and intelligence; and this is true, whether you consider the useful arts or the imitative arts whose end is beauty, such as the statuary’s art, painting, or household management, and the art of healing derived from Asclepius whose oracles are found everywhere on earth, and the god grants to us a share in them perpetually. At any rate, when I have been sick, Asclepius has often cured me by prescribing remedies; and of this Zeus is witness. Therefore, if we who have not given ourselves over to the spirit of apostasy, fare better than you in soul and body and external affairs, why do you abandon these teachings of ours and go over to those others?
  [238]And why is it that you do not abide even by the traditions of the Hebrews or accept the law which God has given to them? Nay, you have forsaken their teaching even more than ours, abandoning the religion of your forefathers and giving yourselves over to the predictions of the prophets? For if any man should wish to examine into the truth concerning you, he will find that your impiety is compounded of the rashness of the Jews and the indifference and vulgarity of the Gentiles. For from both sides you have drawn what is by no means their best but their inferior teaching, and so have made for yourselves a border of wickedness. For the Hebrews have precise laws concerning religious worship, and countless sacred things and observances which demand the priestly life and profession. But though their lawgiver forbade them to serve all the gods save only that one, whose “portion is Jacob, and Israel an allotment of his inheritance”; though he did not say this only, but methinks added also “Thou shalt not revile the gods”; yet the shamelessness and audacity of later generations, desiring to root out all reverence from the mass of the people, has thought that blasphemy accompanies the neglect of worship. This, in fact, is the only thing that you have drawn from this source; for in all other respects you and the Jews have nothing in common. Nay, it is from the new-fangled teaching of the Hebrews that you have seized upon this blasphemy of the gods who are honoured among us; but the reverence for every higher nature, characteristic of our religious worship, combined with the love of the traditions of our forefathers, you have cast off, and have acquired only the habit of eating all things, “even as the green herb.” But to tell the truth, you have taken pride in outdoing our vulgarity, (this, I think, is a thing that happens to all nations, and very naturally) and you thought that you must adapt your ways to the lives of the baser sort, shopkeepers, tax-gatherers, dancers and libertines.
  [245]But that not only the Galilaeans of our day but also those of the earliest time, those who were the first to receive the teaching from Paul, were men of this sort, is evident from the testimony of Paul himself in a letter addressed to them. For unless he actually knew that they had committed all these disgraceful acts, he was not, I think, so impudent as to write to those men themselves concerning their conduct, in language for which, even though in the same letter he included as many eulogies of them, he ought to have blushed, yes, even if those eulogies were deserved, while if they were false and fabricated, then he ought to have sunk into the ground to escape seeming to behave with wanton flattery and slavish adulation. But the following are the very words that Paul wrote concerning those who had heard his teaching, and were addressed to the men themselves: “Be not deceived: neither idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with men, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And of this ye are not ignorant, brethren, that such were you also; but ye washed yourselves, but ye were sanctified in the name of Jesus Christ.” Do you see that he says that these men too had been of such sort, but that they “had been sanctified” and “had been washed,” water being able to cleanse and winning power to purify when it shall go down into the soul? And baptism does not take away his leprosy from the leper, or scabs, or pimples, or warts, or gout, or dysentery, or dropsy, or a whitlow, in fact no disorder of the body, great or small, then shall it do away with adultery and theft and in short all the transgressions of the soul? ...
  [253]Now since the Galilaeans say that, though they are different from the Jews, they are still, precisely speaking, Israelites in accordance with their prophets, and that they obey Moses above all and the prophets who in Judaea succeeded him, let us see in what respect they chiefly agree with those prophets. And let us begin with the teaching of Moses, who himself also, as they claim, foretold the birth of Jesus that was to be. Moses, then, not once or twice or thrice but very many times says that men ought to honour one God only, and in fact names him the Highest; but that they ought to honour any other god he nowhere says. He speaks of angels and lords and moreover of several gods, but from these he chooses out the first and does not assume any god as second, either like or unlike him, such as you have invented. And if among you perchance you possess a single utterance of Moses with respect to this, you are bound to produce it. For the words “A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; to him shall ye hearken,” were certainly not said of the son of Mary. And even though, to please you, one should concede that they were said of him, Moses says that the prophet will be like him and not like God, a prophet like himself and born of men, not of a god. And the words “The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a leader from his loins,” were most certainly not said of the son of Mary, but of the royal house of David, which, you observe, came to an end with King Zedekiah. And certainly the Scripture can be interpreted in two ways when it says “until there comes what is reserved for him”; but you have wrongly interpreted it “until he comes for whom it is reserved.” But it is very clear that not one of these sayings relates to Jesus; for he is not even from Judah. How could he be when according to you he was not born of Joseph but of the Holy Spirit? For though in your genealogies you trace Joseph back to Judah, you could not invent even this plausibly. For Matthew and Luke are refuted by the fact that they disagree concerning his genealogy. [261]However, as I intend to examine closely into the truth of this matter in my Second Book, I leave it till then. But granted that he really is “a sceptre from Judah,” then he is not “God born of God,” as you are in the habit of saying, nor is it true that “All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made.” But, say you, we are told in the Book of Numbers also: “There shall arise a star out of Jacob, and a man out of Israel.” It is certainly clear that this relates to David and to his descendants; for David was a son of Jesse.
  If therefore you try to prove anything from these writings, show me a single saying that you have drawn from that source whence I have drawn very many. But that Moses believed in one God, the God of Israel, he says in Deuteronomy: “So that thou mightest know that the Lord thy God he is one God; and there is none else beside him.” [262]And moreover he says besides, “And lay it to thine heart that this the Lord thy God is God in the heaven above and upon the earth beneath, and there is none else.” And again, “Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God is one Lord.” And again, “See that I am and there is no God save me.” These then are the words of Moses when he insists that there is only one God. But perhaps the Galilaeans will reply: “But we do not assert that there are two gods or three.” But I will show that they do assert this also, and I call John to witness, who says: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God.” You see that the Word is said to be with God? Now whether this is he who was born of Mary or someone else, – that I may answer Photinus at the same time, – this now makes no difference; indeed I leave the dispute to you; but it is enough to bring forward the evidence that he says “with God,” and “in the beginning.” How then does this agree with the teachings of Moses?
  “But,” say the Galilaeans, “it agrees with the teachings of Isaiah. For Isaiah says, ’Behold the virgin shall conceive and bear a son.’ “Now granted that this is said about a god, though it is by no means so stated; for a married woman who before her conception had lain with her husband was no virgin, – but let us admit that it is said about her, – does Isaiah anywhere say that a god will be born of the virgin? But why do you not cease to call Mary the mother of God, if Isaiah nowhere says that he that is born of the virgin is the “only begotten Son of God” and “the firstborn of all creation”? But as for the saying of John, “All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made,” can anyone point this out among the utterances of the prophets? But now listen to the sayings that I point out to you from those same prophets, one after another. “O Lord our God, make us thine; we know none other beside thee.” And Hezekiah the king has been represented by them as praying as follows: “O Lord God of Israel, that sittest upon the Cherubim, thou art God, even thou alone.” Does he leave any place for the second god? [276]But if, as you believe, the Word is God born of God and proceeded from the substance of the Father, why do you say that the virgin is the mother of God? For how could she bear a god since she is, according to you, a human being? And moreover, when God declares plainly “I am he, and there is none that can deliver beside me,” [277]do you dare to call her son Saviour?
  [290]And that Moses calls the angels gods you may hear from his own words, “The sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.” And a little further on: “And also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became the giants which were of old, the men of renown.” Now that he means the angels is evident, and this has not been foisted on him from without, but it is clear also from his saying that not men but giants were born from them. For it is clear that if he had thought that men and not beings of some higher and more powerful nature were their fathers, he would not have said that the giants were their offspring. For it seems to me that he declared that the race of giants arose from the mixture of mortal and immortal. Again, when Moses speaks of many sons of God and calls them not men but angels, would he not then have revealed to mankind, if he had known thereof, God the “only begotten Word,” or a son of God or however you call him? But is it because he did not think this of great importance that he says concerning Israel, “Israel is my firstborn son?” Why did not Moses say this about Jesus also? He taught that there was only one God, but that he had many sons who divided the nations among themselves. But the Word as firstborn son of God or as a God, or any of those fictions which have been invented by you later, he neither knew at all nor taught openly thereof. You have now heard Moses himself and the other prophets. [291]Moses, therefore, utters many sayings to the following effect and in many places: “Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve.” How then has it been handed down in the Gospels that Jesus commanded: “Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,” if they were not intended to serve him also? And your beliefs also are in harmony with these commands, when along with the Father you pay divine honours to the son....
  And now observe again how much Moses says about the deities that avert evil: “And he shall take two he-goats of the goats for a sin-offering, and one ram for a burnt offering. [299]And Aaron shall bring also his bullock of the sin-offering, which is for himself, and make an atonement for himself and for his house. And he shall take the two goats and present them before the Lord at the door of the tabernacle of the covenant. And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats; one lot for the Lord and the other lot for the scape-goat” so as to send him forth, says Moses, as a scape-goat, and let him loose into the wilderness. Thus then is sent forth the goat that is sent for a scape-goat. And of the second goat Moses says: “Then shall he kill the goat of the sin-offering that is for the people before the Lord, and bring his blood within the vail, and shall sprinkle the blood upon the altar-step, and shall make an atonement for the holy place, because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel and because of their transgressions in all their sins.” [305]Accordingly it is evident from what has been said, that Moses knew the various methods of sacrifice. And to show that he did not think them impure as you do, listen again to his own words. “But the soul that eateth of the flesh of the sacrifice of peace-offerings that pertain unto the Lord, having his uncleanness upon him, even that soul shall be cut off from his people.” So cautious is Moses himself with regard to the eating of the flesh of sacrifice.
  But now I had better remind you of what I said earlier, since on account of that I have said this also. Why is it, I repeat, that after deserting us you do not accept the law of the Jews or abide by the sayings of Moses? No doubt some sharp-sighted person will answer, “The Jews too do not sacrifice.” But I will convict him of being terribly dull-sighted, for in the first place I reply that neither do you also observe any one of the other customs observed by the Jews; and, secondly, that the Jews do sacrifice in their own houses, [306]and even to this day everything that they eat is consecrated; and they pray before sacrificing, and give the right shoulder to the priests as the firstfruits; but since they have been deprived of their temple, or, as they are accustomed to call it, their holy place, they are prevented from offering the firstfruits of the sacrifice to God. But why do you not sacrifice, since you have invented your new kind of sacrifice and do not need Jerusalem at all? And yet it was superfluous to ask you this question, since I said the same thing at the beginning, when I wished to show that the Jews agree with the Gentiles, except that they believe in only one God. That is indeed peculiar to them and strange to us; since all the rest we have in a manner in common with them – temples, sanctuaries, altars, purifications, and certain precepts. For as to these we differ from one another either not at all or in trivial matters....
  [314]Why in your diet are you not as pure as the Jews, and why do you say that we ought to eat everything “even as the green herb,” putting your faith in Peter, because, as the Galilaeans say, he declared, “What God hath cleansed, that make not thou common”? What proof is there of this, that of old God held certain things abominable, but now has made them pure? For Moses, when he is laying down the law concerning four-footed things, says that whatsoever parteth the hoof and is cloven-footed and cheweth the cud is pure, but that which is not of this sort is impure. Now if, after the vision of Peter, the pig has now taken to chewing the cud, then let us obey Peter; for it is in very truth a miracle if, after the vision of Peter, it has taken to that habit. But if he spoke falsely when he said that he saw this revelation, – to use your own way of speaking, – in the house of the tanner, why are we so ready to believe him in such important matters? Was it so hard a thing that Moses enjoined on you when, besides the flesh of swine, he forbade you to eat winged things and things that dwell in the sea, and declared to you that besides the flesh of swine these also had been cast out by God and shown to be impure?
  [319]But why do I discuss at length these teachings of theirs, when we may easily see whether they have any force? For they assert that God, after the earlier law, appointed the second. For, say they, the former arose with a view to a certain occasion and was circumscribed by definite periods of time, but this later law was revealed because the law of Moses was circumscribed by time and place. That they say this falsely I will clearly show by quoting from the books of Moses not merely ten but ten thousand passages as evidence, where he says that the law is for all time. Now listen to a passage from Exodus: “And this day shall be unto you for a memorial; and ye shall keep it a feast to the Lord throughout your generations; ye shall keep it a feast by an ordinance forever; the first day shall ye put away leaven out of your houses.” ... Many passages to the same effect are still left, but on account of their number I refrain from citing them to prove that the law of Moses was to last for all time. But do you point out to me where there is any statement by Moses of what was later on rashly uttered by Paul, I mean that “Christ is the end of the law.” Where does God announce to the Hebrews a second law besides that which was established? [320]Nowhere does it occur, not even a revision of the established law. For listen again to the words of Moses: “Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish aught from it. Keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you this day.” And “Cursed be every man who does not abide by them all.” But you have thought it a slight thing to diminish and to add to the things which were written in the law; and to transgress it completely you have thought to be in every way more manly and more high-spirited, because you do not look to the truth but to that which will persuade all men.
  [327]But you are so misguided that you have not even remained faithful to the teachings that were handed down to you by the apostles. And these also have been altered., so as to be worse and more impious, by those who came after. At any rate neither Paul nor Matthew nor Luke nor Mark ventured to call Jesus God. But the worthy John, since he perceived that a great number of people in many of the towns of Greece and Italy had already been infected by this disease, and because he heard, I suppose, that even the tombs of Peter and Paul were being worshipped – secretly, it is true, but still he did hear this, – he, I say, was the first to venture to call Jesus God. And after he had spoken briefly about John the Baptist he referred again to the Word which he was proclaiming, and said, “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us.” But how, he does not say, because he was ashamed. Nowhere, however, does he call him either Jesus or Christ, so long as he calls him God and the Word, but as it were insensibly and secretly he steals away our ears, and says that John the Baptist bore this witness on behalf of Jesus Christ, that in very truth he it is whom we must believe to be God the Word. [333]But that John says this concerning Jesus Christ I for my part do not deny. And yet certain of the impious think that Jesus Christ is quite distinct from the Word that was proclaimed by John. That however is not the case. For he whom John himself calls God the Word, this is he who, says he, was recognised by John the Baptist to be Jesus Christ. Observe accordingly how cautiously, how quietly and insensibly he introduces into the drama the crowning word of his impiety; and he is so rascally and deceitful that he rears his head once more to add, “No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.” Then is this only begotten Son which is in the bosom of the Father the God who is the Word and became flesh? And if, as I think, it is indeed he, you also have certainly beheld God. For “He dwelt among you, and ye beheld his glory.” Why then do you add to this that “No man hath seen God at any time”? For ye have indeed seen, if not God the Father, still God who is the Word. But if the only begotten Son is one person and the God who is the Word another, as I have heard from certain of your sect, then it appears that not even John made that rash statement.
  [335]However this evil doctrine did originate with John; but who could detest as they deserve all those doctrines that you have invented as a sequel, while you keep adding many corpses newly dead to the corpse of long ago? You have filled the whole world with tombs and sepulchres, and yet in your scriptures it is nowhere said that you must grovel among tombs and pay them honour. But you have gone so far in iniquity that you think you need not listen even to the words of Jesus of Nazareth on this matter. Listen then to what he says about sepulchres: “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres; outward the tomb appears beautiful, but within it is full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness.” If, then, Jesus said that sepulchres are full of uncleanness, how can you invoke God at them? ...
  [339]Therefore, since this is so, why do you grovel among tombs? Do you wish to hear the reason? It is not I who will tell you, but the prophet Isaiah: “They lodge among tombs and in caves for the sake of dream visions.” [340]You observe, then, how ancient among the Jews was this work of witchcraft, namely, sleeping among tombs for the sake of dream visions. And indeed it is likely that your apostles, after their teacher’s death, practised this and handed it down to you from the beginning, I mean to those who first adopted your faith, and that they themselves performed their spells more skilfully than you do, and displayed openly to those who came after them the places in which they performed this witchcraft and abomination.
  [343]But you, though you practise that which God from the first abhorred, as he showed through Moses and the prophets, have refused nevertheless to offer victims at the altar, and to sacrifice. “Yes,” say the Galilaeans, “because fire will not descend to consume the sacrifices as in the case of Moses.” Only once, I answer, did this happen in the case of Moses; and again after many years in the case of Elijah the Tishbite. For I will prove in a few words that Moses himself thought that it was necessary to bring fire from outside for the sacrifice, and even before him, Abraham the patriarch as well...
  [346]And this is not the only instance, but when the sons of Adam also offered firstfruits to God, [347]the Scripture says, “And the Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offerings; but unto Cain and to his offerings he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell. And the Lord God said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen? Is it not so – if thou offerest rightly, but dost not cut in pieces rightly, thou hast sinned?” Do you then desire to hear also what were their offerings? “And at the end of days it came to pass that Cain brought of the fruits of the ground an offering unto the Lord. And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof.” You see, say the Galilaeans, it was not the sacrifice but the division thereof that God disapproved when he said to Cain, “If thou offerest rightly, but dost not cut in pieces rightly, hast thou not sinned?” This is what one of your most learned bishops told me. But in the first place he was deceiving himself and then other men also. For when I asked him in what way the division was blameworthy he did not know how to get out of it, or how to make me even a frigid explanation. And when I saw that he was greatly embarrassed, I said; “God rightly disapproved the thing you speak of. For the zeal of the two men was equal, in that they both thought that they ought to offer up gifts and sacrifices to God. But in the matter of their division one of them hit the mark and the other fell short of it. How, and in what manner? Why, since of things on the earth some have life and others are lifeless, and those that have life are more precious than those that are lifeless to the living God who is also the cause of life, inasmuch as they also have a share of life and have a soul more akin to his – for this reason God was more graciously inclined to him who offered a perfect sacrifice.”
  [351]Now I must take up this other point and ask them, Why, pray, do you not practise circumcision? “Paul,” they answer, “said that circumcision of the heart but not of the flesh was granted unto Abraham because he believed. Nay it was not now of the flesh that he spoke, and we ought to believe the pious words that were proclaimed by him and by Peter.” On the other hand hear again that God is said to have given circumcision of the flesh to Abraham for a covenant and a sign: “This is my covenant which ye shall keep, between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations. Ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin, and it shall be in token of a covenant betwixt me and thee and betwixt me and thy seed.” ... Therefore when He has undoubtedly taught that it is proper to observe the law, and threatened with punishment those who transgress one commandment, what manner of defending yourselves will you devise, you who have transgressed them all without exception? For either Jesus will be found to speak falsely, or rather you will be found in all respects and in every way to have failed to preserve the law. [354]“The circumcision shall be of thy flesh,” says Moses. But the Galilaeans do not heed him, and they say: “We circumcise our hearts.” By all means. For there is among you no evildoer, no sinner; so thoroughly do you circumcise your hearts. They say: “We cannot observe the rule of unleavened bread or keep the Passover; for on our behalf Christ was sacrificed once and for all.” Very well! Then did he forbid you to eat unleavened bread? And yet, I call the gods to witness, I am one of those who avoid keeping their festivals with the Jews; but nevertheless I revere always the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; who being themselves Chaldaeans, of a sacred race, skilled in theurgy, had learned the practice of circumcision while they sojourned as strangers with the Egyptians. And they revered a God who was ever gracious to me and to those who worshipped him as Abraham did, for he is a very great and powerful God, but he has nothing to do with you. For you do not imitate Abraham by erecting altars to him, or building altars of sacrifice and worshipping him as Abraham did, with sacrificial offerings. [356]For Abraham used to sacrifice even as we Hellenes do, always and continually. And he used the method of divination from shooting stars. Probably this also is an Hellenic custom. But for higher things he augured from the flight of birds.
  And he possessed also a steward of his house who set signs for himself. And if one of you doubts this, the very words which were uttered by Moses concerning it will show him clearly: “After these sayings the word of the Lord came unto Abraham in a vision of the night, sayings Fear not, Abraham: I am thy shield. Thy reward shall be exceeding great. And Abraham said. Lord God what wilt thou give me? For I go childless, and the son of Masek the slave woman will be my heir. And straightway the word of the Lord came unto him saying, This man shall not be thine heir: but he that shall come forth from thee shall be thine heir. And he brought him forth and said unto him, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be. And Abraham believed in the Lord: and it was counted to him for righteousness.”
  Tell me now why he who dealt with him, whether angel or God, brought him forth and showed him the stars? For while still within the house did he not know how great [357]is the multitude of the stars that at night are always visible and shining? But I think it was because he wished to show him the shooting stars, so that as a visible pledge of his words he might offer to Abraham the decision of the heavens that fulfills and sanctions all things. [358]And lest any man should think that such an interpretation is forced, I will convince him by adding what comes next to the above passage. For it is written next: “And he said unto him, I am the Lord that brought thee out of the land of the Chaldees, to give thee this land to inherit it. And he said, Lord God, whereby shall I know that I shall inherit it? And he said unto him, Take me an heifer of three years old, and a she-goat of three years old, and a ram of three years old, and a turtle-dove and a pigeon. And he took unto him all these, and divided them in the midst, and laid each piece one against another; but the birds divided he not. And the fowls came down upon the divided carcases, and Abraham sat down among them.”
  You see how the announcement of the angel or god who had appeared was strengthened by means of the augury from birds, and how the prophecy was completed, not at haphazard as happens with you, but with the accompaniment of sacrifices? Moreover he says that by the flocking together of the birds he showed that his message was true. And Abraham accepted the pledge, and moreover declared that a pledge that lacked truth seemed to be mere folly and imbecility. But it is not possible to behold the truth from speech alone, but some clear sign must follow on what has been said, a sign that by its appearance shall guarantee the prophecy that has been made concerning the future....
  [351]However, for your indolence in this matter there remains for you one single excuse, namely, that you are not permitted to sacrifice if you are outside Jerusalem, [324]though for that matter Elijah sacrificed on Mount Carmel, and not in the holy city.

Τῆς πεϱὶ ϑεῶν ἀμαϑίας ϰαὶ ἀγνοίας εὐϑὺς ἐξ ἀϱχῆς δίχα ῥυείσης; τὸ μὲν ὥσπεϱ ἐν χωϱίοις σϰληϱοῖς τοῖς ἀντιτύποις ἤϑεσι τὴν ἀϑεότητα, τὸ δ᾽ ὥσπεϱ ἐν ὑγϱοῖς τοῖς ἁπαλοῖς τὴν δεισιδαιμονίαν πεποίηϰεν. ἅπασα μὲν οὖν ϰϱίσις ψευδής, ἄλλως τε ϰἂν πεϱὶ ταῦτα, μοχϑηϱόν δὲ ϰαὶ πάϑος πϱόσεστι, μοχϑηϱότατον. πᾶν γὰϱ πάϑος ἔοιϰε πληγὴ 1 φλεγμαίνουσα εἶναι ϰαὶ ϰαϑάπεϱ αἱ μετὰ τϱαύματος ἐϰβολαὶ τῶν ἄϱϑϱων, οὕτως αἱ μετὰ πάϑους διαστϱοφαὶ τῆς ψυχῆς χαλεπώτεϱαι. ἀτόμους τις οἴεται ϰαὶ ϰενὸν ἀϱχὰς εἶναι τῶν ὅλων ψευδὴς ἡ ὑπόληψις, ἀλλ᾽ ἕλϰος οὐ ποιεῖ οὐδὲ σφυγμὸν οὐδ᾽ ὀδύνην ταϱάττουσαν. ὑπολαμβάνει τις τὸν πλοῦτον ἀγαϑὸν εἶναι μέγιστον: τοῦτο τὸ ψεῦδος ἰὸν ἔχει, νέμεται τὴν ψυχήν, ἐξίστησιν, οὐϰ ἐᾷ ϰαϑεύδειν, οἴστϱων ἐμπίπλησιν, ὠϑεῖ ϰατὰ πετϱῶν, ἄγχει, τὴν παϱϱησίαν ἀφαιϱεῖται. πάλιν οἴονταί τινες εἶναι σῶμα τὴν ἀϱετὴν ϰαὶ τὴν ϰαϰίαν αἰσχϱὸν ἴσως τὸ ἀγνόημα, ϑϱήνων δὲ ϰαὶ ὀδυϱμῶν οὐϰ ἄξιον ἀλλ᾽ αἵτινές εἰσι τοιαῦται ϰϱίσεις ϰαὶ ὑπολήψεις
 ὦ τλῆμον ἀϱετή, λόγος ἄϱ᾽ ἦσϑ᾽ ἐγὼ δέ σε
 ὡς ἔϱγον ἤσϰουν
ἀφεὶς τὴν πλουτοποιὸν ἀδιϰίαν ϰαὶ τὴν γόνιμον ἁπάσης ἡδονῆς ἀϰολασίαν, ταύτας ἄξιόν ἐστιν οἰϰτίϱειν ὁμοῦ ϰαὶ δυσχεϱαίνειν, ὅτι πολλὰ νοσήματα ϰαὶ πάϑη ϰαϑάπεϱ εὐλὰς ϰαὶ σϰώληϰας ἐντίϰτουσι ταῖς ψυχαῖς παϱοῦσαι. [2]οὐϰοῦν ϰαὶ πεϱὶ ὧν ὁ λόγος, ἡ μὲν ἀϑεότης ϰϱίσις οὖσα φαύλη τοῦ μηδὲν εἶναι μαϰάϱιον ϰαὶ ἄφϑαϱτον εἰς ἀπάϑειάν τινα δοϰεῖ τῇ ἀπιστίᾳ τοῦ ϑείου πεϱιφέϱειν, ϰαὶ τέλος ἐστὶν αὐτῇ τοῦ μὴ νομίζειν ϑεοὺς τὸ μὴ φοβεῖσϑαι: τὴν δεισιδαιμονίαν δὲ μηνύει ϰαὶ τοὔνομα δόξαν ἐμπαϑῆ ϰαὶ δέους ποιητιϰὴν ὑπόληψιν οὖσαν ἐϰταπεινοῦντος ϰαὶ συντϱίβοντος τὸν ἄνϑϱωπον, οἰόμενον μὲν εἶναι ϑεούς, εἶναι δὲ λυπηϱοὺς ϰαὶ βλαβεϱούς. ἔοιϰε γὰϱ ὁ μὲν ἄϑεος ἀϰίνητος εἶναι πϱὸς τὸ ϑεῖον, ὁ δὲ δεισιδαίμων ϰινούμενος ὡς οὐ πϱοσήϰει διαστϱέφεσϑαι. ἡ γὰϱ ἄγνοια τῷ μὲν ἀπιστίαν τοῦ ὠφελοῦντος ἐμπεποίηϰε, τῷ δὲ ϰαὶ δόξαν ὅτι βλάπτει πϱοστέϑειϰεν. ὅϑεν ἡ μὲν ἀϑεότης λόγος ἐστὶ διεψευσμένος, ἡ δὲ δεισιδαιμονία πάϑος ἐϰ λόγου ψευδοῦς ἐγγεγενημένον. [3]αἰσχϱὰ μὲν δὴ πάντα τὰ τῆς ψυχῆς; νοσήματα ϰαὶ πάϑη, τὸ δὲ γαῦϱον ἐνίοις ὅμως ϰαὶ ὑψηλὸν ϰαὶ διηϱμένον ἔνεστιν ὑπὸ ϰουφότητος, δϱαστηϱίου δ᾽ ὁϱμῆς οὐδὲν ὡς ἔπος εἰπεῖν ἀπεστέϱηται. ἀλλὰ τοῦτο δὴ τὸ ϰοινὸν ἔγϰλημα παντὸς πάϑους ἐστίν, ὅτι ταῖς πϱαϰτιϰαῖς ὁϱμαῖς ἐϰβιαζόμενα ϰατεπείγει ϰαὶ συντείνει τὸν λογισμόν. μόνος δ᾽, ὁ φόβος, οὐχ ἧττον ὢν τόλμης ἐνδεὴς ἢ λογισμοῦ, ἄπϱαϰτον ἔχει ϰαὶ ἄποϱον ϰαὶ ἀμήχανον τὸ ἀλόγιστον. ϰαὶ δεῖμα ϰαὶ τάϱβος αὐτοῦ τὸ συνδέον ὁμοῦ τὴν ψυχὴν ϰαὶ ταϱάττον ὠνόμασται. φόβων δὲ πάντων ἀπϱαϰτότατος ϰαὶ ἀποϱώτατος ὁ τῆς δεισιδαιμονίας. οὐ φοβεῖται ϑάλασσαν ὁ μὴ πλέων οὐδὲ πόλεμον ὁ μὴ στϱατευόμενος, οὐδὲ λῃστὰς ὁ οἰϰουϱῶν οὐδὲ συϰοφάντην ὁ πένης οὐδὲ φϑόνον ὁ ἰδιώτης, οὐδὲ σεισμὸν ὁ ἐν Γαλάταις οὐδὲ ϰεϱαυνὸν ὁ ἐν Αἰϑίοψιν: ὁ δὲ ϑεοὺς δεδιὼς πάντα δέδιε, γῆν ϑάλατταν ἀέϱα οὐϱανὸν σϰότος φῶς ϰληδόνα σιωπὴν ὄνειϱον. οἱ δοῦλοι τῶν δεσποτῶν ἐπιλανϑάνονται ϰαϑεύδοντες, τοῖς πεδήταις ἐπελαφϱύνει τὸν δεσμὸν ὁ ὕπνος, φλεγμοναὶ πεϱὶ τϱαύματα ϰαὶ νομαὶ σαϱϰὸς ϑηϱιώδεις ϰαὶ πεϱιωδυνίαι ϰοιμωμένων ἀφίστανται
 ὦ φίλον ὕπνου ϑέλγητϱον ἐπίϰουϱον νόσου,
 ὡς ἡδύ μοι πϱοσῆλϑες ἐν δέοντί γε
τοῦτ᾽ οὐ δίδωσιν εἰπεῖν ἡ δεισιδαιμονία μόνη γὰϱ οὐ σπένδεται πϱὸς τὸν ὕπνον, οὐδὲ τῇ ψυχῇ ποτε γοῦν δίδωσιν ἀναπνεῦσαι ϰαὶ ἀναϑαϱϱῆσαι τὰς πιϰϱὰς ϰαὶ βαϱείας πεϱὶ τοῦ ϑεοῦ δόξας ἀπωσαμένῃ, ἀλλ᾽ ὥσπεϱ ἐν ἀσεβῶν χώϱῳ τῷ ὕπνῳ τῶν δεισιδαιμόνων εἴδωλα φϱιϰώδη ϰαὶ τεϱάστια φάσματα ϰαὶ ποινάς τινας ἐγείϱουσα ϰαὶ στϱοβοῦσα τὴν ἀϑλίαν ψυχὴν ἐϰδιώϰει τοῖς ὀνείϱοις ἐϰ τῶν ὕπνων, μαστιζομένην ϰαὶ ϰολαζομένην αὐτὴν ὑφ᾽ αὑτῆς ὡς ὑφ᾽ ἑτέϱου, ϰαὶ δεινὰ πϱοστάγματα ϰαὶ ἀλλόϰοτα λαμβάνουσαν. εἶτ᾽ ἐξαναστάντες οὐ ϰατεφϱόνησαν οὐδὲ ϰατεγέλασαν, οὐδ᾽ ᾔσϑοντο ὅτι τῶν ταϱαξάντων οὐδὲν ἦν ἀληϑινόν, ἀλλὰ σϰιὰν φεύγοντες ἀπάτης οὐδὲν ϰαϰὸν ἐχούσης ὕπαϱ ἐξαπατῶσιν ἑαυτοὺς ϰαὶ δαπανῶσι ϰαὶ ταϱάττουσιν, εἰς ἀγύϱτας ϰαὶ γόητας ἐμπεσόντες λέγοντας
 ἀλλ᾽ εἴτ᾽ ἔνυπνον φάντασμα φοβεῖ,
 χϑονίας ϑ᾽ Ἑϰάτης ϰῶμον ἐδέξω,
τὴν πεϱιμάϰτϱιαν ϰάλει γϱαῦν ϰαὶ βάπτισον σεαυτὸν εἰς ϑάλασσαν ϰαὶ ϰαϑίσας ἐν τῇ γῇ διημέϱευσον.
 ὦ βάϱβαϱ᾽ ἐξευϱόντες Ἕλληνες ϰαϰά
τῇ δεισιδαιμονίᾳ, πηλώσεις ϰαταβοϱβοϱώσεις βαπτισμούς, ῥίψεις ἐπὶ πϱόσωπον, αἰσχϱὰς; πϱοϰαϑίσεις, ἀλλοϰότους πϱοσϰυνήσεις. διϰαίῳ τῷ στόματι τοὺς ϰιϑαϱῳδοὺς ἐϰέλευον ᾄδειν οἱ τὴν νόμιμον μουσιϰὴν σῴζειν δοϰοῦντες: ἡμεῖς δὲ τοῖς ϑεοῖς ἀξιοῦμεν ὀϱϑῷ τῷ στόματι ϰαὶ διϰαίῳ πϱοσεύχεσϑαι, ϰαὶ μὴ τὴν ἐπὶ τῶν σπλάγχνων μὲν γλῶτταν εἰ ϰαϑαϱὰ ϰαὶ ὀϱϑὴ σϰοπεῖν, τὴν δ᾽ ἑαυτῶν διαστϱέφοντας ϰαὶ μολύνοντας ἀτόποις ὀνόμασι ϰαὶ ῥήμασι βαϱβαϱιϰοῖς ϰαταισχύνειν ϰαὶ παϱανομεῖν εἰς τὸ ϑεῖον ϰαὶ πάτϱιον ἀξίωμα τῆς εὐσεβείας. ἀλλ᾽ ὅ γε ϰωμιϰὸς οὐϰ ἀηδῶς εἴϱηϰέ που πϱὸς τοὺς ϰαταχϱυσοῦντας τὰ ϰλινίδια ϰαὶ ϰαταϱγυϱοῦντας
 ὅ τι μόνον ἡμῖν πϱοῖϰ᾽ ἔδωϰαν οἱ ϑεοὶ
 τὸν ὕπνου, τί τοῦτο πολυτελὲς σαυτῷ ποιεῖς;
ἔστι δὲ ϰαὶ πϱὸς τὸν δεισιδαίμονα εἰπεῖν ὅ τι τὸν ὕπνον οἱ ϑεοὶ λήϑην ϰαϰῶν ἔδοσαν ἡμῖν ϰαὶ ἀνάπαυσιν, τί τοῦτο ϰολαστήϱιον σαυτῷ ποιεῖς ἐπίμονον ϰαὶ ὀδυνηϱόν, τῆς ἀϑλίας ψυχῆς εἰς ἄλλον ὕπνον 0 ἀποδϱᾶναι μὴ δυναμένης; ὁ Ἡϱάϰλειτός φησι τοῖς ἐγϱηγοϱόσιν ἕνα ϰαὶ ϰοινὸν ϰόσμον εἶναι, τῶν δὲ ϰοιμωμένων ἕϰαστον εἰς ἴδιον ἀναστϱέφεσϑαι. τῷ δὲ δεισιδαίμονι ϰοινὸς οὐδεὶς οὐδ᾽ ἴδιός ἐστι ϰόσμος: οὔτε γὰϱ ἐγϱηγοϱὼς τῷ φϱονοῦντι χϱῆται οὔτε ϰοιμώμενος ἀπαλλάττεται τοῦ ταϱάττοντος, ἀλλ᾽ ὀνειϱώττει μὲν ὁ λογισμός, ἐγϱήγοϱε δ᾽ ὁ φόβος ἀεί, φυγὴ δ᾽ οὐϰ ἔστιν οὐδὲ μετάστασις. [4]ἦν φοβεϱὸς ἐν Σάμῳ Πολυϰϱάτης τύϱαννος, ἦν ἐν Κοϱίνϑῳ Πεϱίανδϱος, ἀλλ᾽ οὐδεὶς ἐφοβεῖτο τούτους μεταστὰς εἰς πόλιν ἐλευϑέϱαν ϰαὶ δημοϰϱατουμένην. ὁ δὲ τὴν τῶν ϑεῶν ἀϱχὴν ὡς τυϱαννίδα φοβούμενος σϰυϑϱωπὴν ϰαὶ ἀπαϱαίτητον ποῖ μεταστῇ ποῖ φύγῃ, ποίαν γῆν ἄϑεον εὕϱῃ, ποίαν ϑάλασσαν; εἰς τί ϰαταδὺς τοῦ ϰόσμου μέϱος ϰαὶ ἀποϰϱύψας σεαυτόν, ὦ ταλαίπωϱε, πιστεύσεις ὅτι τὸν ϑεὸν ἀποπέφευγας; ἔστι ϰαὶ δούλοις νόμος ἐλευϑεϱίαν ἀπογνοῦσι πϱᾶσιν αἰτεῖσϑαι ϰαὶ δεσπότην μεταβάλλειν ἐπιειϰέστεϱον: ἡ δὲ δεισιδαιμονία ϑεῶν ἀλλαγὴν οὐ δίδωσιν, οὐδ᾽ ἔστιν εὑϱεῖν ὃν οὐ φοβήσεται ϑεὸν ὁ φοβούμενος τοὺς πατϱῴους ϰαὶ γενεϑλίους, ὁ φϱίττων τοὺς σωτῆϱας; ϰαὶ τοὺς μειλιχίους τϱέμων ϰαὶ δεδοιϰώς, παϱ᾽ ὧν αἰτούμεϑα πλοῦτον εὐποϱίαν εἰϱήνην ὁμόνοιαν ὄϱϑωσιν λόγων ϰαὶ ἔϱγων τῶν, ἀϱίστων. εἶϑ᾽ οὗτοι τὸ δουλεύειν ἀτύχημα ἡγοῦνται ϰαὶ λέγουσι
 δεινή τις ἀνδϱὶ ϰαὶ γυναιϰὶ συμφοϱὰ
 δούλους γενέσϑαι δεσπότας τε δυσχεϱεῖς λαβεῖν
πόσῳ δὲ δεινότεϱον οἴεσϑε πάσχειν αὐτοὺς ἀνεϰφεύ ϰτους ἀναποδϱάστους ἀνυποστάτους λαμβάνοντας; ἔστι δούλῳ φεύξιμος βωμός, ἔστι ϰαὶ λῃσταῖς ἀβέβηλα πολλὰ τῶν ἱεϱῶν, ϰαὶ πολεμίους οἱ φεύγοντες ἂν ἀγάλματος λάβωνται ἢ ναοῦ, ϑαϱϱοῦσιν: ὁ δὲ δεισιδαίμων ταῦτα μάλιστα φϱίττει ϰαὶ φοβεῖται ϰαὶ δέδοιϰεν, ἐν οἷς οἱ φοβούμενοι τὰ δεινότατα τὰς ἐλπίδας ἔχουσι. μὴ ἀπόσπα τὸν δεισιδαίμονα τῶν ἱεϱῶν: ἐνταῦϑα ϰολάζεται ϰαὶ τιμωϱεῖται. τί δεῖ μαϰϱὰ λέγειν; „πέϱας ἐστὶ τοῦ βίου πᾶσιν ἀνϑϱώποις ὁ ϑάνατος:’ τῆς δὲ δεισιδαιμονίας οὐδ᾽ οὗτος, ἀλλ᾽ ὑπεϱβάλλει τοὺς ὅϱους ἐπέϰεινα τοῦ ζῆν, μαϰϱότεϱον τοῦ βίου ποιοῦσα τὸν φόβον ϰαὶ συνάπτουσα τῷ ϑανάτῳ ϰαϰῶν ἐπίνοιαν ἀϑανάτων, ϰαὶ ὅτε παύεται πϱαγμάτων, ἄϱχεσϑαι δοϰοῦσα μὴ παυομένων. Ἅιδου τινὲς ἀνοίγονται πύλαι βαϑεῖαι, ϰαὶ ποταμοὶ πυϱὸς ὁμοῦ ϰαὶ Στυγὸς ἀποϱϱῶγες ἀναϰεϱάννυνται , ϰαὶ σϰότος ἐμπίπλαται πολυφαντάστων εἰδώλων τινῶν χαλεπὰς μὲν ὄψεις οἰϰτϱὰς δὲ φωνὰς ἐπιφεϱόντων, διϰασταὶ δὲ ϰαὶ ϰολασταὶ ϰαὶ χάσματα ϰαὶ μυχοὶ μυϱίων ϰαϰῶν γέμοντες. οὕτως ἡ ϰαϰοδαίμων δεισιδαιμονία τῇ πεϱιττῇ πϱὸς ἅπαν τὸ δοϰοῦν δεινὸν εὐλαβείᾳ λανϑάνει ἑαυτὴν ὑποβάλλουσα παντοίοις δεινοῖς. [5]τούτων οὐδὲν τῇ ἀϑεότητι πϱόσεστιν, ἀλλ᾽ ἡ μὲν ἄγνοια χαλεπὴ ϰαὶ τὸ παϱοϱᾶν ϰαὶ τυφλώττειν πεϱὶ τηλιϰαῦτα συμφοϱὰ μεγάλη ψυχῆς, ὥσπεϱ ὀμμάτων πολλῶν τὸ φανότατον ϰαὶ ϰυϱιώτατον ἀπεσβεσμένης τὴν τοῦ ϑεοῦ νόησιν. ταύτῃ δὲ τὸ ἐμπαϑές, ὥσπεϱ εἴϱηται, ϰαὶ ἑλϰῶδες ϰαὶ ταϱαϰτιϰὸν ϰαὶ ϰαταδεδουλωμένον εὐϑὺς; πϱόσεστι τῇ δόξῃ. μουσιϰήν φησιν ὁ Πλάτων ἐμμελείας ϰαὶ εὐϱυϑμίας δημιουϱγὸν ἀνϑϱώποις ὑπὸ ϑεῶν οὐ τϱυφῆς ἕνεϰα ϰαὶ ϰνήσεως ὤτων δοϑῆναι, ἀλλ᾽ ὥστε τῶν τῆς ψυχῆς πεϱιόδων ϰαὶ ἁϱμονιῶν τὸ ταϱαχῶδες ϰαὶ πεπλανημένον ἐν σώματι, μούσης τε ϰαὶ χάϱιτος ἐνδείᾳ πολλαχῇ δι᾽ ἀϰολασίαν ϰαὶ πλημμέλειαν ἐξυβϱίζον, αὖϑις εἰς τάξιν ἀνελίττουσαν οἰϰείως ϰαὶ πεϱιάγουσαν ϰαϑιστᾶν.
 ὅσσα δὲ μὴ πεφίληϰε Ζεύσ᾽ φησὶ Πίνδαϱος
 ἀτύζονται βοὰν
 Πιεϱίδων ἀίοντα:
ϰαὶ γὰϱ διαγϱιαίνεται ϰαὶ ἀγαναϰτεῖ, ϰαὶ τὰς τίγϱεις δέ φασι πεϱιτυμπανιζομένας ἐϰμαίνεσϑαι ϰαὶ ταϱάττεσϑαι ϰαὶ τέλος αὑτὰς διασπᾶν. ἔλαττον οὖν ϰαϰὸν οἷς διὰ ϰωφότητα ϰαὶ πήϱωσιν ἀϰοῆς ἀπάϑεια πϱὸς μουσιϰὴν ϰαὶ ἀναισϑησία συμβέβηϰεν. ὁ Τειϱεσίας ἐχϱῆτο δυστυχίᾳ μὴ βλέπων τὰ τέϰνα μηδὲ τοὺς συνήϑεις, ὁ δ᾽ Ἀϑάμας μείζονι ϰαὶ ἡ Ἀγαύη, βλέποντες ὡς λέοντας ϰαὶ ἐλάφους ϰαὶ τῷ Ἡϱαϰλεῖ δήπου μανέντι τοὺς υἱοὺς ἐλυσιτέλει μήτ᾽ ἰδεῖν μήτ᾽ αἰσϑέσϑαι παϱόντας ἢ χϱῆσϑαι τοῖς φιλτάτοις ὡς πολεμίοις. [6]τί οὖν; οὐ δοϰεῖ σοι ϰαὶ τὸ τῶν ἀϑέων πϱὸς τοὺς δεισιδαίμονας πάϑος ἔχειν τοιαύτην διαφοϱάν; οἱ μὲν οὐχ ὁϱῶσι τοὺς ϑεοὺς τὸ παϱάπαν, οἱ δὲ ϰαϰοὺς ὑπάϱχειν νομίζουσιν οἱ μὲν παϱοϱῶσιν, οἱ δὲ δοξάζουσι φοβεϱὸν τὸ εὐμενὲς ϰαὶ τυϱαννιϰὸν τὸ πατϱιϰὸν ϰαὶ βλαβεϱὸν τὸ ϰηδεμονιϰὸν ϰαὶ τὸ ἄμιϰτον ἄγϱιον εἶναι ϰαὶ ϑηϱιῶδες. εἶτα χαλϰοτύποις μὲν πείϑονται ϰαὶ λιϑοξόοις ϰαὶ ϰηϱοπλάσταις ἀνϑϱωπόμοϱφα τῶν ϑεῶν τὰ εἴδη ποιοῦσι, ϰαὶ τοιαῦτα πλάττουσι ϰαὶ ϰατασϰευάζουσι ϰαὶ πϱοσϰυνοῦσι: φιλοσόφων δὲ ϰαὶ πολιτιϰῶν ἀνδϱῶν ϰαταφϱονοῦσιν, ἀποδειϰνύντων τὴν τοῦ ϑεοῦ σεμνότητα μετὰ χϱηστότητος ϰαὶ μεγαλοφϱοσύνης ϰαὶ εὐμενείας ϰαὶ ϰηδεμονίας. πεϱίεστιν οὖν τοῖς μὲν ἀναισϑησία ϰαὶ ἀπιστία τῶν ὠφελούντων, τοῖς δὲ ταϱαχὴ ϰαὶ φόβος; πϱὸς τὰ ὠφελοῦντα. ϰαὶ ὅλως ἡ μὲν ἀϑεότης ἀπάϑεια πϱὸς τὸ ϑεῖόν ἐστι μὴ νοοῦσα τὸ ἀγαϑόν, ἡ δὲ δεισιδαιμονία πολυπάϑεια ϰαϰὸν τὸ ἀγαϑὸν ὑπονοοῦσα. φοβοῦνται τοὺς ϑεοὺς ϰαὶ ϰαταφεύγουσιν ἐπὶ τοὺς ϑεοὺς , ϰολαϰεύουσι ϰαὶ λοιδοϱοῦσιν, εὔχονται ϰαὶ ϰαταμέμφονται. ϰοινὸν ἀνϑϱώπων τὸ μὴ πάντα διευτυχεῖν:
 ϰεῖνοι γάϱ τ᾽ ἄνοσοι ϰαὶ ἀγήϱαοι
 πόνων τ᾽ ἄπειϱοι, βαϱυβόαν
 ποϱϑμὸν πεφευγότες Ἀχέϱοντος
, ὁ Πίνδαϱος φησι, τὰ δ᾽ ἀνϑϱώπινα πάϑη ϰαὶ πϱάγματα μέμιϰται συντυχίαις ἄλλοτ᾽ ἄλλως ῥεούσαις. [7]φέϱε δὴ πϱῶτον ἐν τοῖς ἀβουλήτοις σϰόπει τὸν ἄϑεον ϰαὶ ϰαταμάνϑανε τὴν διάϑεσιν, ἂν τἄλλα μέτϱιος, χϱωμένου σιωπῇ τοῖς παϱοῦσι ϰαὶ ποϱίζοντος αὑτῷ βοηϑείας ϰαὶ παϱηγοϱίας, ἂν δὲ δυσφοϱῇ ϰαὶ πεϱιπαϑῇ, πάντας ἐπὶ τὴν τύχην ϰαὶ τὸ αὐτόματον ἀπεϱειδομένου τοὺς ὀδυϱμοὺς ϰαὶ βοῶντος ὡς οὐδὲν ϰατὰ δίϰην οὐδ᾽ ἐϰ πϱονοίας ἀλλὰ πάντα συγϰεχυμένως ϰαὶ ἀϰϱίτως φέϱεται ϰαὶ ταϱάττεται τὰ τῶν ἀνϑϱώπων. τοῦ δὲ δεισιδαίμονος οὐχ οὗτος ὁ τϱόπος, ἀλλ᾽ εἰ ϰαὶ μιϰϱότατον αὐτῷ ϰαϰόν τι συμπεπτωϰός ἐστιν, ἄλλα ϰάϑηται πάϑη χαλεπὰ ϰαὶ μεγάλα ϰαὶ δυσαπάλλαϰτα τῇ λύπῃ πϱοσοιϰοδομῶν, ϰαὶ πϱοσεμφοϱῶν αὑτῷ δείματα ϰαὶ φόβους ϰαὶ ὑποψίας ϰαὶ ταϱαχάς, παντὶ ϑϱήνῳ ϰαὶ παντὶ στεναγμῷ ϰαϑαπτόμενος: οὔτε γὰϱ ἄνϑϱωπον οὔτε τύχην οὔτε ϰαιϱὸν οὔτε ἑαυτὸν ἀλλὰ πάντων τὸν ϑεὸν αἰτιᾶται, ϰἀϰεῖϑεν ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸν ἥϰειν ϰαὶ φέϱεσϑαι ῥεῦμα δαιμόνιον ἄτης φησί, ϰαὶ ὡς οὐ δυστυχὴς ὢν ἀλλὰ ϑεομισής τις ἄνϑϱωπος ὑπὸ τῶν ϑεῶν ϰολάζεσϑαι ϰαὶ δίϰην διδόναι ϰαὶ πάντα πάσχειν πϱοσηϰόντως δι᾽ αὑτὸν οἴεται. νοσῶν ϑ᾽ ὁ ἄϑεος ἐϰλογίζεται ϰαὶ ἀναμιμνῄσϰεται πλησμονὰς αὑτοῦ ϰαὶ οἰνώσεις ϰαὶ ἀταξίας πεϱὶ δίαιταν ἢ ϰόπους ὑπεϱβάλλοντας ἢ μεταβολὰς ἀέϱων ἀήϑεις ϰαὶ τόπων, ἔπειτα πϱοσϰϱούσας ἐν πολιτείαις ϰαὶ πεϱιπεσὼν ἀδοξίαις πϱὸς ὄχλον ἢ διαβολαῖς πϱὸς ἡγεμόνα τὴν αἰτίαν ἐξ αὑτοῦ ϰαὶ τῶν: πεϱὶ αὑτὸν σϰοπεῖ
 πῆ παϱέβην; τί δ᾽ ἔϱεξα; τί μοι δέον οὐϰ ἐτελέσϑη;
τῷ δὲ δεισιδαίμονι ϰαὶ σώματος ἀϱϱωστία πᾶσα ϰαὶ χϱημάτων ἀποβολὴ ϰαὶ τέϰνων ϑάνατοι ϰαὶ πεϱὶ πολιτιϰὰς πϱάξεις δυσημεϱίαι ϰαὶ ἀποτεύξεις πληγαὶ ϑεοῦ ϰαὶ πϱοσβολαὶ δαίμονος λέγονται. ὅϑεν οὐδὲ τολμᾷ βοηϑεῖν οὐδὲ διαλύειν τὸ συμβεβηϰὸς οὐδὲ ϑεϱαπεύειν οὐδ᾽ ἀντιτάττεσϑαι, μὴ δόξῃ ϑεομαχεῖν ϰαὶ ἀντιτείνειν ϰολαζόμενος, ἀλλ᾽ ὠϑεῖται μὲν ἔξω νοσοῦντος ὁ ἰατϱός, ἀποϰλείεται δὲ πενϑοῦντος ὁ νουϑετῶν ϰαὶ παϱαμυϑούμενος φιλόσοφος. „ἔα με’ φησὶν „ἄνϑϱωπε διδόναι δίϰην, τὸν ἀσεβῆ , τὸν ἐπάϱατον, τὸν ϑεοῖς ϰαὶ δαίμοσι μεμισημένον. ’ ἔστιν ἀνϑϱώπου μὴ πεπεισμένου ϑεοὺς εἶναι λυπουμένου δ᾽ ἄλλως; ϰαὶ πεϱιπαϑοῦντος ἀπομάξαι δάϰϱυον, ἀποϰεῖϱαι ϰόμην, ἀφελέσϑαι τὸ ἱμάτιον τὸν δὲ δεισιδαίμονα πῶς ἂν πϱοσείποις ἢ ποῦ βοηϑήσεις; ἔξω ϰάϑηται σαϰϰίον ἔχων, ϰαὶ πεϱιεζωσμένος ῥάϰεσι ῥυπαϱοῖς πολλάϰις δὲ γυμνὸς ἐν πηλῷ ϰυλινδούμενος ἐξαγοϱεύει τινὰς ἁμαϱτίας αὑτοῦ ϰαὶ πλημμελείας, ὡς τόδε φαγόντος ἢ πιόντος ἢ βαδίσαντος ὁδὸν ἣν οὐϰ εἴα τὸ δαιμόνιον. ἂν δ᾽ ἄϱιστα πϱάττῃ ϰαὶ συνῇ πϱάῳ δεισιδαιμονίᾳ, πεϱιϑειούμενος οἴϰοι ϰάϑηται ϰαὶ πεϱιματτόμενος, αἱ δὲ γϱᾶες „ϰαϑάπεϱ παττάλῳ’ φησὶν ὁ Βίων „ὅ τι ἂν τύχωσιν αὐτῷ πεϱιάπτουσι φέϱουσαι ϰαὶ πεϱιαϱτῶσι ’ [8]τὸν Τιϱίβαζόν φασιν ὑπὸ τῶν Πεϱσῶν συλλαμβανόμενον σπάσασϑαί τε τὸν ἀϰινάϰην, εὔϱωστον ὄντα, ϰαὶ διαμάχεσϑαι: μαϱτυϱομένων δὲ ϰαὶ βοώντων ὅτι συλλαμβάνουσιν αὐτὸν βασιλέως ϰελεύσαντος, αὐτίϰα τὸ ξίφος ϰαταβαλεῖν ϰαὶ τὼ χεῖϱε συνδῆσαι παϱασχεῖν. ἆϱ᾽ οὖν οὐχ ὅμοιόν ἐστι τὸ γιγνόμενον; οἱ μὲν ἄλλοι διαμάχονται συμφοϱαῖς ϰαὶ διωϑοῦνται τὰ πϱάγματα, φυγὰς ἑαυτοῖς μηχανώμενοι ϰαὶ παϱατϱοπὰς τῶν ἀβουλήτων ὁ δὲ δεισιδαίμων οὐδενὸς ἀϰούσας, αὐτὸς πϱὸς αὑτὸν εἰπών „ταῦτα πάσχεις, ὦ ϰαϰόδαιμον, ἐϰ πϱονοίας ϰαὶ ϑεοῦ ϰελεύοντος’ ἔϱϱιψε πᾶσαν ἐλπίδα, πϱοήϰατο ἑαυτόν, ἔφυγε διεϰϱούσατο τοὺς βοηϑοῦντας. πολλὰ τῶν μετϱίων ϰαϰῶν ὀλέϑϱια ποιοῦσιν αἱ δεισιδαιμονίαι. Μίδας ὁ παλαιός, ὡς ἔοιϰεν, ἔϰ τινων ἐνυπνίων ἀϑυμῶν ϰαὶ ταϱαττόμενος οὕτω ϰαϰῶς ἔσχε τὴν ψυχήν, ὥσϑ᾽ ἑϰουσίως ἀποϑανεῖν αἷμα ταύϱου πιών. ὁ δὲ τῶν Μεσσηνίων βασιλεὺς Ἀϱιστόδημος ἐν τῷ πϱὸς Λαϰεδαιμονίους πολέμῳ, ϰυνῶν: λύϰοις ὠϱυομένων ὅμοια ϰαὶ πεϱὶ τὴν ἑστίαν αὐτοῦ τὴν πατϱῴαν ἀγϱώστεως ἀναβλαστανούσης ϰαὶ τῶν μάντεων τὰ σημεῖα φοβουμένων, ἐξαϑυμήσας ϰαὶ ϰατασβεσϑεὶς ταῖς ἐλπίσιν αὐτὸς ἑαυτὸν ἀπέσφαξεν. ἦν δ᾽ ἴσως ϰαὶ Νιϰίᾳ τῷ Ἀϑηναίων στϱατηγῷ ϰϱάτιστον οὕτως ἀπαλλαγῆναι τῆς δεισιδαιμονίας ὡς Μίδας ἢ Ἀϱιστόδημος ἢ φοβηϑέντι τὴν σϰιὰν ἐϰλιπούσης τῆς σελήνης ϰαϑῆσϑαι πεϱιτειχιζόμενον ὑπὸ τῶν πολεμίων, εἶϑ᾽ ὁμοῦ τέτταϱσι μυϱιάσιν ἀνϑϱώπων φονευϑέντων τε ϰαὶ ζώντων ἁλόντων ὑποχείϱιον γενέσϑαι ϰαὶ δυσϰλεῶς ἀποϑανεῖν. οὐ γὰϱ γῆς,: ἀντίφϱαξις ἐν μέσῳ γενομένης φοβεϱόν, οὐδὲ δεινὸν ἐν ϰαιϱῷ πεϱιόδων σϰιᾶς πϱὸς σελήνην ἀπάντησις, ἀλλὰ δεινὸν τὸ τῆς δεισιδαιμονίας σϰότος ἐϰπεσόντος ἀνϑϱώπου συγχέαι ϰαὶ τυφλῶσαι λογισμὸν ἐν πϱάγμασι μάλιστα λογισμοῦ δεομένοις
 Γλαῦϰ, ὅϱα, βαϑὺς γὰϱ ἤδη ϰύμασι ταϱάσσεται
 πόντος, ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἄϰϱᾳ Γυϱέων ὀϱϑὸν ἵσταται νέφος,
 σῆμα χειμῶνος.
τοῦτ᾽ ἰδὼν ϰυβεϱνήτης εὔχεται μὲν ὑπεϰφυγεῖν ϰαὶ ϑεοὺς ἐπιϰαλεῖται σωτῆϱας, εὐχόμενος δὲ τὸν οἴαϰα πϱοσάγει, τὴν ϰεϱαίαν ὑφίησι,
 φεύγει μέγα λαῖφος ὑποστολίσας ἐϱεβώδεος ἐϰ ϑαλάσσης.
ὁ Ἡσίοδος 0 ϰελεύει πϱὸ ἀϱότου ϰαὶ σπόϱου τὸν γεωϱγὸν εὔχεσϑαί Διὶ χϑονίῳ Δημήτεϱὶ ϑ᾽ ἁγνῇ τῆς ἐχέτλης ἐχόμενον, Ὅμηϱος δὲ τὸν Αἴαντά φησι τῷ Ἕϰτοϱι μέλλοντα μονομαχεῖν εὔχεσϑαι ϰελεύειν τοὺς Ἕλληνας ὑπὲϱ αὐτοῦ τοῖς ϑεοῖς, εἶτ᾽ εὐχομένων ἐϰείνων ὁπλίζεσϑαι. ϰαὶ ὁ Ἀγαμέμνων ὅτε τοῖς μαχομένοις πϱοσέταξεν
 εὖ μέν τις δόϱυ ϑηξάσϑω, εὖ δ᾽ ἀσπίδα ϑέσϑω,
τότε παϱὰ τοῦ Διὸς αἰτεῖ
 δός με ϰατὰ πϱηνὲς βαλέειν Πϱιάμοιο μέλαϑϱον:
ἀϱετῆς γὰϱ ἐλπὶς ὁ ϑεός ἐστιν, οὐ δειλίας πϱόφασις. ἀλλ᾽ Ἰουδαῖοι σαββάτων ὄντων ἐν ἀγνάπτοις ϰαϑεζόμενοι, τῶν πολεμίων ϰλίμαϰας πϱοστιϑέντων ϰαὶ τὰ τείχη ϰαταλαμβανόντων, οὐϰ ἀνέστησαν ἀλλ᾽ ἔμειναν ὥσπεϱ ἐν σαγήνῃ μιᾷ τῇ δεισιδαιμονίᾳ συνδεδεμένοι. [9]τοιαύτη μὲν ἐν τοῖς ἀβουλήτοις ϰαὶ πεϱιστατιϰοῖς λεγομένοις πϱάγμασι ϰαὶ ϰαιϱοῖς ἡ δεισιδαιμονία, βελτίων δ᾽ οὐδὲν οὐδ᾽ ἐν τοῖς ἡδίοσι τῆς ἀϑεότητος. ἣδιστα δὲ τοῖς ἀνϑϱώποις ἑοϱταὶ ϰαὶ εἰλαπίναι πϱὸς ἱεϱοῖς ϰαὶ μυήσεις ϰαὶ ὀϱγιασμοὶ ϰαὶ ϰατευχαὶ ϑεῶν ϰαὶ πϱοσϰυνήσεις. ἐνταῦϑα τοίνυν σϰόπει τὸν ἄϑεον γελῶντα μὲν μανιϰὸν ϰαὶ Σαϱδόνιον γέλωτα τοῖς ποιουμένοις ϰαί που παϱαφϑεγγόμενον ἀτϱέμα πϱὸς τοὺς συνήϑεις ὅτι τετύφωνται ϰαὶ δαιμονῶσιν οἱ ϑεοῖς ταῦτα δϱᾶσϑαι νομίζοντες, ἄλλο δ᾽ οὐδὲν ἔχοντα ϰαϰόν. ὁ δὲ δεισιδαίμων βούλεται μὲν οὐ δύναται δὲ χαίϱειν οὐδ᾽ ἥδεσϑαι,
 πόλις δ᾽ ὁμοῦ μὲν ϑυμιαμάτων γέμει,
 ὁμοῦ δὲ παιάνων τε ϰαὶ στεναγμάτων
ἡ ψυχὴ τοῦ δεισιδαίμονος. ἐστεφανωμένος ὠχϱιᾷ, ϑύει ϰαὶ φοβεῖται, εὔχεται φωνῇ παλλομένῃ ϰαὶ χεϱσὶν ἐπιϑυμιᾷ τϱεμούσαις, ϰαὶ ὅλως ἀποδείϰνυσι τὸν Πυϑαγόϱου λόγον φλύαϱον εἰπόντος; ὅτι βέλτιστοι γιγνόμεϑα πϱὸς τοὺς ϑεοὺς βαδίζοντες : τότε γὰϱ ἀϑλιώτατα ϰαὶ ϰάϰιστα πϱάττουσιν οἱ δεισιδαίμονες, ὥσπεϱ ἄϱϰτων φωλεοῖς ἢ χειαῖς δϱαϰόντων ἢ μυχοῖς ϰητῶν τοῖς τῶν ϑεῶν μεγάϱοις ἢ ἀναϰτόϱοις πϱοσιόντες. [10]ὅϑεν ἔμοιγε ϰαὶ ϑαυμάζειν ἔπεισι τοὺς τὴν ἀϑεότητα φάσϰοντας ἀσέβειαν εἶναι , μὴ φάσϰοντας δὲ τὴν δεισιδαιμονίαν. ϰαίτοι γ᾽ Ἀναξαγόϱας δίϰην ἔφυγεν ἀσεβείας ἐπὶ τῷ λίϑον εἰπεῖν τὸν ἥλιον, Κιμμεϱίους δ᾽ οὐδεὶς εἶπεν ἀσεβεῖς ὅτι τὸν ἥλιον οὐδ᾽ εἶναι τὸ παϱάπαν νομίζουσι. τί σὺ λέγεις; ὁ μὴ νομίζων ϑεοὺς ἀνόσιός ἐστιν; ὁ δὲ τοιούτους νομίζων οἵους οἱ δεισιδαίμονες, οὐ μαϰϱῷ δόξαις ἀνοσιωτέϱαις σύνεστιν; ἐγὼ γοῦν ἂν ἐϑέλοιμι μᾶλλον τοὺς ἀνϑϱώπους λέγειν πεϱὶ ἐμοῦ μήτε γεγονέναι τὸ παϱάπαν μήτ᾽ εἶναι Πλούταϱχον ἢ λέγειν ὅτι Πλούταϱχός ἐστιν ἄνϑϱωπος ἀβέβαιος εὐμετάβολος, εὐχεϱὴς πϱὸς ὀϱγήν, ἐπὶ τοῖς τυχοῦσι τιμωϱητιϰός, μιϰϱόλυπος: ἂν ϰαλῶν ἐπὶ δεῖπνον ἑτέϱους παϱαλίπῃς ἐϰεῖνον, ἂν ἀσχολίας σοι γενομένης ἐπὶ ϑύϱας μὴ ἔλϑῃς ἢ μὴ πϱοσείπῃς, διέδεταί σου τὸ σῶμα πϱοσφὺς ἢ συλλαβὼν ἀποτυμπανιεῖ τὸ παιδίον, ἢ ϑηϱίον ἔχων τοῖς ϰαϱποῖς ἐφήσει ϰαὶ λυμανεῖται τὴν ὀπώϱαν. τοῦ Τιμοϑέου τὴν Ἄϱτεμιν ᾁδοντος ἐν Ἀϑήναις; ϰαὶ λέγοντος ϑυιάδα φοιβάδα μαινάδα λυσσάδα Κινησίας ὁ μελοποιὸς ἐϰ τῶν ϑεατῶν ἀναστάς „τοιαύτη σοι’ εἶπε „ϑυγάτηϱ γένοιτο.’ ϰαὶ μὴν ὅμοια τούτοις ϰαὶ χείϱω πεϱὶ Ἀϱτέμιδος οἱ δεισιδαίμονες ὑπολαμβάνουσιν αἵ τε ϰἂν ἀπ᾽ ἀγχόνας ἀίξασα αἵ τε ϰαλεχόνα ϰναίσατε αἵ τε ϰανέϰεϰϱος; μαίουσα ἂν πεφυϱμένα ἐσῆλϑες αἵ τε ϰαὶ ἐϰ τϱιπόδων ϰαϑαϱμάτεσσιν ἐπισπώμενα τῷ παλαμναίῳ συμπλεχϑεῖσα. οὐδὲν δὲ τούτων ἐπιειϰέστεϱα φϱονοῦσι πεϱὶ Ἀπόλλωνος; πεϱὶ Ἥϱας πεϱὶ Ἀφϱοδίτης: πάντας γὰϱ τούτους, τϱέμουσι ϰαὶ δεδοίϰασι. ϰαίτοι τί τοσοῦτον ἡ Νιόβη πεϱὶ τῆς Λητοῦς ῦς ἐβλασφήμησεν, ὅσου ἡ δεισιδαιμονία πέπειϰε πεϱὶ τῆς ϑεοῦ τοὺς ἄφϱονας, ὡς ἄϱα λοιδοϱηϑεῖσα ϰατετόξευσε τῆς ἀϑλίας γυναιϰὸς
 ἓξ μὲν ϑυγατέϱας, ἓξ δ᾽ υἱέας ἡβώοντας;
οὕτως ἄπληστος ἀλλοτϱίων ϰαϰῶν ἦν ϰαὶ ἀνίλαστος. εἰ γὰϱ ἀληϑῶς ἡ ϑεὸς χολὴν εἶχε ϰαὶ μισοπόνηϱος ἦν ϰαὶ ἤλγει ϰαϰῶς ἀϰούουσα ϰαὶ μὴ ϰατεγέλα τῆς ἀνϑϱωπίνης ἀμαϑίας ϰαὶ ἀγνοίας ἀλλ᾽ ἠγανάϰτει, τούτους ἔδει ϰατατοξεῦσαι τοὺς τοσαύτην ὠμότητα ϰαὶ πιϰϱίαν ϰαταψευδομένους αὐτῆς ϰαὶ τοιαῦτα λέγοντας ϰαὶ γϱάφοντας. τῆς γοῦν Ἑϰάβης πϱοβαλλόμεϑα τὴν πιϰϱίαν ὡς βάϱβαϱον ϰαὶ ϑηϱιώδη λεγούσης
 τοῦ ἐγὼ μέσον ἧπαϱ ἔχοιμι
 ἐσϑέμεναι πϱοσφῦσα,
τὴν δὲ Συϱίαν ϑεὸν οἱ δεισιδαίμονες νομίζουσιν, ἂν μαινίδας τις ἢ ἀφύας φάγῃ, τὰ ἀντιϰνήμια διεσϑίειν, ἕλϰεσι τὸ σῶμα πιμπϱάναι, συντήϰειν τὸ ἧπαϱ. [11]ἆϱ᾽ οὖν τὸ μὲν λέγειν τὰ φαῦλα πεϱὶ τῶν ϑεῶν ἀνόσιον, τὸ δὲ δοξάζειν οὐϰ ἀνόσιον; ἢ ϰαὶ τὴν φωνὴν ἄτοπον ἡ: δόξα ποιεῖ τοῦ βλασφημοῦντος; ϰαὶ γὰϱ ἡμεῖς τὴν βλασφημίαν ὅτι δυσμενείας σημεῖόν ἐστι πϱοβαλλόμεϑα, ϰαὶ τοὺς ϰαϰῶς ἡμᾶς λέγοντας ἐχϑϱοὺς νομίζομεν ὡς ϰαὶ ϰαϰῶς φϱονοῦντας, ὁϱᾷς δ᾽ οἷα πεϱὶ τῶν ϑεῶν οἱ δεισιδαίμονες φϱονοῦσιν, ἐμπλήϰτους ἀπίστους, εὐμεταβόλους τιμωϱητιϰοὺς ὠμοὺς μιϰϱολύπους ὑπολαμβάνοντες, ἐξ ὧν ἀνάγϰη ϰαὶ μισεῖν τὸν δεισιδαίμονα ϰαὶ φοβεῖσϑαι τοὺς ϑεούς. πῶς γὰϱ οὐ μέλλει, τὰ μέγιστα τῶν ϰαϰῶν αὑτῷ δι᾽ ἐϰείνους οἰόμενος γεγονέναι ϰαὶ πάλιν γενήσεσϑαι; μισῶν δὲ ϑεοὺς ϰαὶ φοβούμενος ἐχϑϱός ἐστι. ϰαίτοι πϱοσϰυνεῖ γε ϰαὶ ϑύει ϰαὶ ϰάϑηται πϱὸς ἱεϱοῖς, ϰαὶ οὐ ’ϑαυμαστόν ἐστι: ϰαὶ γὰϱ τοὺς τυϱάννους ἀσπάζονται πεϱιέπουσι χϱυσοῦς ἀνιστᾶσιν, ἀλλὰ μισοῦσι σιγῇ „ϰάϱα σείοντες.’ Ἀλέξανδϱον Ἑϱμόλαος ἐϑεϱάπευε, Παυσανίας ἐδοϱυφόϱειΦίλιππον, Χαιϱέας Γάιον, ἀλλ᾽ ἕϰαστος τούτων ἔλεγε παϱαϰολουϑῶν
 ἦ σ᾽ ἂν τισαίμην, εἴ μοι δύναμίς γε παϱείη
Οὐϰ οἴεται ϑεοὺς εἶναι ὁ ἄϑεος, ὁ δὲ δεισιδαίμων οὐ βούλεται, πιστεύει δ᾽ ἄϰων φοβεῖται γὰϱ ἀπιστεῖν. ϰαίτοι γ᾽ ὥσπεϱ: ὁ Τάνταλος ὑπεϰδῦναι τὸν λίϑον ἐπαιωϱούμενον οὕτω ϰαὶ οὗτος τὸν φόβον ὡς οὐχ ἧττον ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ, πιεζόμενος ἀγαπήσειεν ἄν, ϰαὶ μαϰαϱίσειε τὴν τοῦ ἀϑέου διάϑεσιν ὡς ἐλευϑέϱιον. νυνὶ δὲ τῷ μὲν ἀϑέῳ δεισιδαιμονίας οὐδὲν μέτεστιν, ὁ δὲ δεισιδαίμων τῇ πϱοαιϱέσει ἄϑεος ὢν ἀσϑενέστεϱός ἐστιν ἢ ὥστε δοξάζειν πεϱὶ ϑεῶν ὃ βούλεται. [12]ϰαὶ μὴν ὁ ἄϑεος δεισιδαιμονίας οὐδαμῆ συναίτιος , ἡ δὲ δεισιδαιμονία τῇ ἀϑεότητι ϰαὶ γενέσϑαι παϱέσχεν ἀϱχὴν ϰαὶ γενομένῃ δίδωσιν ἀπολογίαν, οὐϰ ἀληϑῆ μὲν οὐδὲ ϰαλήν, πϱοφάσεως δέ τινος οὐϰ ἄμοιϱον οὖσαν. οὐ γὰϱ ἐν οὐϱανῷ τι μεμπτὸν οὐδ᾽ ἐν ἄστϱοις οὐδ᾽ ἐν ὥϱαις ἢ πεϱιόδοις σελήνης ἢ ϰινήσεσιν ἡλίου πεϱὶ γῆν, „ἡμέϱας ϰαὶ νυϰτὸς δημιουϱγοῖς,’ ἢ τϱοφαῖς ζῴων ἢ ϰαϱπῶν γενέσεσι πλημμελὲς ϰαὶ ἄταϰτον ἐνιδόντες οὕτως ἀϑεότητα τοῦ παντὸς ϰατέγνωσαν, ἀλλὰ τῆς δεισιδαιμονίας ἔϱγα ϰαὶ πάϑη ϰαταγέλαστα, ϰαὶ ῥήματα ϰαὶ ϰινήματα ϰαὶ γοητεῖαι ϰαὶ μαγεῖαι ϰαὶ πεϱιδϱομαὶ ϰαὶ τυμπανισμοὶ ϰαὶ ἀϰάϑαϱτοι μὲν ϰαϑαϱμοὶ ῥυπαϱαὶ δ᾽ ἁγνεῖαι, βάϱβαϱοι δὲ ϰαὶ παϱάνομοι πϱὸς ἱεϱοῖς ϰολασμοὶ ϰαὶ πϱοπηλαϰισμοί, ταῦτα δίδωσιν ἐνίοις λέγειν ὡς μὴ εἶναι ϑεοὺς ἄμεινον ἢ εἶναι, τοιαῦτα μὲν δεχομένους τοιούτοις δὲ χαίϱοντας, οὕτω δ᾽ ὑβϱιστάς, οὕτω δὲ μιϰϱολόγους [13]ϰαὶ μιϰϱολόγους οὐϰ ἄμεινον οὖν ἦν Γαλάταις ἐϰείνοις ϰαὶ Σϰύϑαις τὸ παϱάπαν μήτ᾽ ἔννοιαν ἔχειν ϑεῶν μήτε φαντασίαν μήϑ᾽ ἱστοϱίαν ἢ ϑεοὺς εἶναι νομίζειν χαίϱοντας ἀνϑϱώπων σφαττομένων αἵματι ϰαὶ τελεωτάτην ϑυσίαν ϰαὶ ἱεϱουϱγίαν ταύτην νομίζοντας; τί δέ; Καϱχηδονίοις οὐϰ ἐλυσιτέλει Κϱιτίαν λαβοῦσιν ἢ Διαγόϱαν νομοϑέτην ἀπ᾽ ἀϱχῆς μήτε τινὰ δαιμόνων μήτε ϑεῶν νομίζειν ἢ τοιαῦτα ϑύειν οἷα τῷ Κϱόνῳ ἔϑυον; οὐχ ὥσπεϱ Ἐμπεδοϰλῆς φησι τῶν τὰ ζῷα ϑυόντων ϰαϑαπτόμενος
 μοϱφὴν δ᾽ ἀλλάξαντα πατὴϱ φίλον υἱὸν ἀείϱας
 σφάζει ἐπευχόμενος μέγα νήπιος,
ἀλλ᾽ εἰδότες ϰαὶ γιγνώσϰοντες αὐτοὶ τὰ αὑτῶν τέϰνα ϰαϑιέϱευον, οἱ δ᾽ ἄτεϰνοι παϱὰ τῶν πενήτων ὠνούμενοι παιδία ϰατέσφαζον ϰαϑάπεϱ ἄϱνας ἢ νεοσσούς, παϱειστήϰει δ᾽ ἡ μήτηϱ ἄτεγϰτος ϰαὶ ἀστέναϰτος. εἰ δὲ στενάξειεν ἢ δαϰϱύσειεν, ἔδει τῆς τιμῆς στέϱεσϑαι, τὸ δὲ παιδίον οὐδὲν ἧττον ἐϑύετο, ϰϱότου τε ϰατεπίμπλατο πάντα πϱὸ τοῦ ἀγάλματος ἐπαυλούντων ϰαὶ τυμπανιζόντων ἕνεϰα τοῦ μὴ γίγνεσϑαι τὴν βοὴν τῶν ϑϱήνων ἐξάϰουστον. εἰ δὲ Τυφῶνές τινες ἢ Γίγαντες ἦϱχον ἡμῶν τοὺς ϑεοὺς ἐϰβαλόντες, ποίαις ἂν ἣδοντο ϑυσίαις ἢ τίνας ἄλλας; ἱεϱουϱγίας ἀπῄτουν; Ἄμηστϱις δ᾽ ἡ Ξέϱξου γυνὴ, δώδεϰα ϰατώϱυξεν ἀνϑϱώπους ζῶντας ὑπὲϱ αὑτῆς τῷ Ἅιδῃ, ὃν ὁ Πλάτων φησὶ φιλάνϑϱωπον ὄντα ϰαὶ σοφὸν ϰαὶ πλούσιον, πειϑοῖ ϰαὶ λόγῳ ϰατέχοντα τὰς ψυχάς, Ἅιδην ὠνομάσϑαι. Ξενοφάνης δ᾽ ὁ φυσιϰὸς τοὺς Αἰγυπτίους ϰοπτομένους ἐν ταῖς ἑοϱταῖς ϰαὶ ϑϱηνοῦντας ὁϱῶν ὑπέμνησεν οἰϰείως. „οὗτοι’ φησὶν „εἰ μὲν ϑεοί εἰσι, μὴ ϑϱηνεῖτε αὐτούς: εἰ δ᾽ ἄνϑϱωποι, μὴ ϑύετε αὐτοῖς;’ [14]ἀλλ᾽ οὐδὲν οὕτω πολυπλανὲς ϰαὶ πολυπαϑὲς νόσημα ϰαὶ μεμιγμένον ἐναντίαις δόξαις ϰαὶ: μαχομέναις μᾶλλον ὡς τὸ τῆς δεισιδαιμονίας. φευϰτέον οὖν αὐτὴν ἀσφαλῶς τε ϰαὶ συμφεϱόντως, οὐχ ὥσπεϱ οἱ λῃστῶν ἢ ϑηϱίων ἔφοδον ἢ πῦϱ ἀπεϱισϰέπτως ϰαὶ ἀλογίστως πεϱιφεύγοντες ἐμπίπτουσιν εἰς ἀνοδίας. βάϱαϑϱα ϰαὶ ϰϱημνοὺς; ἐχούσας. οὕτω γὰϱ ἔνιοι φεύγοντες τὴν δεισιδαιμονίαν ἐμπίπτουσιν εἰς ἀϑεότητα τϱαχεῖαν ϰαὶ ἀντίτυπον, ὑπεϱπηδήσαντες ἐν μέσῳ ϰειμένην τὴν εὐσέβειαν.
 

Our great ignorance of the Divine Beings most naturally runs in two streams; whereof the one in harsh and coarse tempers, as in dry and stubborn soils, produces atheism, and the other in the more tender and flexible, as in moist and yielding grounds, produces superstition. Indeed, every wrong judgment, in matters of this nature especially, is a great unhappiness to us; but it is here attended with a passion, or disorder of the mind, of a worse consequence than itself. For every such passion is, as it were, an error inflamed. And as a dislocation is the more painful when it is attended with a bruise, so are the perversions of our understandings, when attended with passion. Is a man of opinion that atoms and a void were the first origins of things? It is indeed a mistaken conceit, but makes no ulcer, no shooting, no searching pain. But is a man of opinion that wealth is his last good? This error contains in it a canker; it preys upon a man’s spirits, it transports him, it suffers him not to sleep, it makes him horn-mad, it carries him over headlong precipices, strangles him, and makes him unable to speak his mind. Are there some again, that take virtue and vice for substantial bodies? This may be sottish conceit indeed, but yet it bespeaks neither lamentations nor groans. But such opinions and conceits as these, —
 Poor virtue! thou wast but a name, and mere jest,
 And I, choust fool, did practise thee in earnest,
and for thee have I quitted injustice, the way to wealth, and excess, the parent of all true pleasure,—these are the thoughts that call at once for our pity and indignation; for they will engender swarms of diseases, like fly-blows and vermin, in our minds. [2]To return then to our subject, atheism, which is a false persuasion that there are no blessed and incorruptible beings, tends yet, by its disbelief of a Divinity, to bring men to a sort of unconcernedness and indifferency of temper; for the design of those that deny a God is to ease themselves of his fear. But superstition appears by its appellation to be a distempered opinion and conceit, productive of such mean and abject apprehensions as debase and break a man’s spirit, while he thinks there are divine powers indeed, but withal sour and vindictive ones. So that the atheist is not at all, and the superstitious is perversely, affected with the thoughts of God; ignorance depriving the one of the sense of his goodness, and superadding to the other a persuasion of his cruelty. Atheism then is but false reasoning single, but superstition is a disorder of the mind produced by this false reasoning. [3]Every distemper of our minds is truly base and ignoble; yet some passions are accompanied with a sort of levity, that makes men appear gay, prompt, and erect; but none, we may say, are wholly destitute of force for action. But the common charge upon all sorts of passions is, that they excite and urge the reason, forcing it by their violent stings. Fear alone, being equally destitute of reason and audacity, renders our whole irrational part stupid, distracted, and unserviceable. Therefore it is called δεῖμα because it binds, and τάϱβος because it distracts the mind.1 But of all fears, none so dozes and confounds as that of superstition. He fears not the sea that never goes to sea; nor a battle, that follows not the camp; nor robbers, that stirs not abroad; nor malicious informers, that is a poor man; nor emulation, that leads a private life; nor earthquakes, that dwells in Gaul; nor thunderbolts, that dwells in Ethiopia: but he that dreads divine powers dreads every thing, the land, the sea, the air, the sky, the dark, the light, a sound, a silence, a dream. Even slaves forget their masters in their sleep; sleep lightens the irons of the fettered; their angry sores, mortified gangrenes, and pinching pains allow them some intermission at night.
 Dear sleep, sweet easer of my irksome grief,
 Pleasant thou art! how welcome thy relief!
Superstition will not permit a man to say this. That alone will give no truce at night, nor suffer the poor soul so much as to breathe or look up, or respite her sour and dismal thoughts of God a moment; but raises in the sleep of the superstitious, as in the place of the damned, certain prodigious forms and ghastly spectres, and perpetually tortures the unhappy soul, chasing her out of sleep into dreams, lashed and tormented by her own self, as by some other, and charged by herself with dire and portentous injunctions. Neither have they, when awake, enough sense to slight and smile at all this, or to be pleased with the thought that nothing of all that terrified them was real; but they still fear an empty shadow, that could never mean them any ill, and cheat themselves afresh at noonday, and keep a bustle, and are at expense upon the next fortuneteller or vagrant that shall but tell them: —
 If in a dream hobgoblin thou hast seen,
 Or felt’st the rambling guards o’ th’ Fairy Queen,
send for some old witch who can purify thee, go dip thyself in the sea, and then sit down upon the bare ground the rest of the day.
 O that our Greeks should found such barbarous rites,
as tumbling in mire, rolling themselves in dunghills, keeping of Sabbaths, monstrous prostrations, long and obstinate sittings in a place, and vile and abject adorations, and all for vain superstition! They that were careful to preserve good singing used to direct the practisers of that science to sing with their mouths in their true and proper postures. Should not we then admonish those that would address themselves to the heavenly powers to do that also with a true and natural mouth, lest, while we are so solicitous that the tongue of a sacrifice be pure and right, we distort and abuse our own with silly and canting language, and thereby expose the dignity of our divine and ancient piety to contempt and raillery? It was not unpleasantly said somewhere by the comedian to those that adorned their beds with the needless ornaments of silver and gold: Since the Gods have given us nothing gratis except sleep, why will you make that so costly? It might as well be said to the superstitious bigot: Since the Gods have bestowed sleep on us, to the intent we may take some rest and forget our sorrows, why will you needs make it a continual irksome tormentor, when you know your poor soul hath ne’er another sleep to betake herself to? Heraclitus saith: They who are awake have a world in common amongst them; but they that are asleep are retired each to his own private world. But the frightful visionary hath ne’er a world at all, either in common with others or in private to himself; for neither can he use his reason when awake, nor be free from his fears when asleep; but he hath his reason always asleep, and his fears always awake; nor hath he either an hiding-place or refuge. [4]Polycrates was formidable at Samos, and so was Periander at Corinth; but no man ever feared either of them that had made his escape to an equal and free government. But he that dreads the divine government, as a sort of inexorable and implacable tyranny, whither can he remove? Whither can he fly? What land, what sea can he find where God is not? Wretched and miserable man! in what corner of the world canst thou so hide thyself, as to think thou hast now escaped him? Slaves are allowed by the laws, when they despair of obtaining their freedom, to demand a second sale, in hopes of kinder masters. But superstition allows of no change of Gods; nor could he indeed find a God he would not fear, that dreads his own and his ancestors’ guardians, that quivers at his preservers and benign patrons, and that trembles and shakes at those of whom we ask wealth, plenty, concord, peace, and direction to the best words and actions. Slaves again account it their misfortune to become such, and can say, —
 Both man and wife in direful slavery,
 And with ill masters too! Fate’s worst decree!
But how much less tolerable, think you, is their condition, that can never possibly run away, escape, or desert? A slave may fly to an altar, and many temples afford sanctuary to thieves; and they that are pursued by an enemy think themselves safe if they can catch hold on a statue or a shrine. But the superstitious fears, quivers, and dreads most of all there, where others when fearfullest take greatest courage. Never hale a superstitious man from the altar. It is his place of torment; he is there chastised. In one word, death itself, the end of life, puts no period to this vain and foolish dread; but it transcends those limits, and extends its fears beyond the grave, adding to it the imagination of immortal ills; and after respite from past sorrows, it fancies it shall next enter upon never-ending ones. I know not what gates of hell open themselves from beneath, rivers of fire together with Stygian torrents present themselves to view; a gloomy darkness appears full of ghastly spectres and horrid shapes, with dreadful aspects and doleful groans, together with judges and tormentors, pits and caverns, full of millions of miseries and woes. Thus does wretched superstition bring inevitably upon itself by its fancies even those calamities which it has once escaped. [5]Atheism is attended with none of this. True indeed, the ignorance is very lamentable and sad. For to be blind or to see amiss in matters of this consequence cannot but be a fatal unhappiness to the mind, it being then deprived of the fairest and brightest of its many eyes, the knowledge of God. Yet this opinion (as hath been said) is not necessarily accompanied with any disordering, ulcerous, frightful, or slavish passion. Plato thinks the Gods never gave men music, the science of melody and harmony, for mere delectation or to tickle the ear, but in order that the confusion and disorder in the periods and harmonies of the soul, which often for want of the Muses and of grace break forth into extravagance through intemperance and license, might be sweetly recalled, and artfully wound up to their former consent and agreement.
 No animal accurst by Jove
 Music’s sweet charms can ever love,
saith Pindar. For all such will rave and grow outrageous straight. Of this we have an instance in tigers, which (as they say), if they hear but a tabor beat near them, will rage immediately and run stark mad, and in fine tear themselves in pieces. They certainly suffer the less inconvenience of the two, who either through defect of hearing or utter deafness are wholly insensible of music, and therefore unmoved by it. It was a great misfortune indeed to Tiresias, that he wanted sight to see his friends and children; but a far greater to Athamas and Agave, to see them in the shape of lions and bucks. And it had been happier for Hercules, when he was distracted, if he could have neither seen nor known his children, than to have used like the worst of enemies those he so tenderly loved. [6]Well then, is not this the very case of the atheist, compared with the superstitious? The former sees not the Gods at all, the latter believes that he really sees them; the former wholly overlooks them, but the latter mistakes their benignity for terror, their paternal affection for tyranny, their providence for cruelty, and their frank simplicity for savageness and brutality. Again, the workman in copper, stone, and wax can persuade such that the Gods are in human shape; for so they make them, so they draw them, and so they worship them. But they will not hear either philosophers or statesmen that describe the majesty of the Divinity as accompanied by goodness, magnanimity, benignity, and beneficence. The one therefore hath neither a sense nor belief of that divine good he might participate of; and the other dreads and fears it. In a word, atheism is an absolute insensibility to God (or want of passion), which does not recognize goodness; while superstition is a blind heap of passions, which imagine the good to be evil. They are afraid of their Gods, and yet run to them; they fawn upon them, and reproach them; they invoke them, and accuse them. It is the common destiny of humanity not to enjoy uninterrupted felicity.
 Nor pains, nor age, nor labor they e’er bore,
 Nor visited rough Acheron’s hoarse shore,
saith Pindar of the Gods; but human passions and affairs are liable to a strange multiplicity of uncertain accidents and contingencies. [7]Consider well the atheist, and observe his behavior first in things not under the disposal of his will. If he be otherwise a man of good temper, he is silent under his present circumstances, and is providing himself with either remedies or palliatives for his misfortunes. But if he be a fretful and impatient man, his whole complaint is against Fortune. He cries out, that nothing is managed here below either after the rules of a strict justice or the orderly course of a providence, and that all human affairs are hurried and driven without either premeditation or distinction. This is not the demeanor of the superstitious; if the least thing do but happen amiss to him, he sits him down plunged in sorrow, and raises himself a vast tempest of intolerable and incurable passions, and presents his fancy with nothing but terrors, fears, surmises, and distractions, until he hath overwhelmed himself with groans and fears. He blames neither man, nor Fortune, nor the times, nor himself; but charges all upon God, from whom he fancies a whole deluge of vengeance to be pouring down upon him; and, as if he were not only unfortunate but in open hostility with Heaven, he imagines that he is punished by God and is now making satisfaction for his past crimes, and saith that his sufferings are all just and owing to himself. Again, when the atheist falls sick, he reckons up and calls to his remembrance his several surfeits and debauches, his irregular course of living, excessive labors, or unaccustomed changes of air or climate. Likewise, when he miscarries in any public administration, and either falls into popular disgrace or comes to be ill presented to his prince, he searches for the causes in himself and those about him, and asks,
 Where have I erred? What have I done amiss?
 What should be done by me that undone is?
But the fanciful superstitionist accounts every little distemper in his body or decay in his estate, the death of his children, and crosses and disappointments in matters relating to the public, as the immediate strokes of God and the incursions of some vindictive daemon. And therefore he dares not attempt to remove or relieve his disasters, or to use the least remedy or to oppose himself to them, for fear he should seem to struggle with God and to make resistance under correction. If he be sick, he thrusts away the physician; if he be in any grief, he shuts out the philosopher that would comfort and advise him. Let me alone, saith he, to pay for my sins: I am a cursed and vile offender, and detestable both to God and angels. Now suppose a man unpersuaded of a Divinity in never so great sorrow and trouble, you may yet possibly wipe away his tears, cut his hair, and force away his mourning; but how will you come at this superstitious penitentiary, either to speak to him or to bring him any relief? He sits him down without doors in sackcloth, or wrapped up in foul and nasty rags; yea, many times rolls himself naked in mire, repeating over I know not what sins and transgressions of his own; as, how he did eat this thing and drink the other thing, or went some way prohibited by his Genius. But suppose he be now at his best, and laboring under only a mild attack of superstition; you shall even then find him sitting down in the midst of his house all becharmed and bespelled, with a parcel of old women about him, tugging all they can light on, and hanging it upon him as (to use an expression of Bion’s) upon some nail or peg. [8]It is reported of Teribazus that, being seized by the Persians, he drew out his scimitar, and being a very stout person, defended himself bravely; but when they cried out and told him he was apprehended by the king’s order, he immediately put up his sword, and presented his hands to be bound. Is not this the very case of the superstitious? Others can oppose their misfortunes, repel their troubles, and furnish themselves with retreats, or means of avoiding the stroke of things not under the disposal of their wills; but the superstitious person, without anybody’s speaking to him,—but merely upon his own saying to himself, This thou undergoest, vile wretch, by the direction of Providence, and by Heaven’s just appointment,—immediately casts away all hope, surrenders himself up, and shuns and affronts his friends that would relieve him. Thus do these sottish fears oftentimes convert tolerable evils into fatal and insupportable ones. The ancient Midas (as the story goes of him), being much troubled and disquieted by certain dreams, grew so melancholy thereupon, that he made himself away by drinking bull’s blood. Aristodemus, king of Messenia, when a war broke out betwixt the Lacedaemonians and the Messenians, upon some dogs howling like wolves, and grass coming up about his ancestors’ domestic altar, and his divines presaging ill upon it, fell into such a fit of sullenness and despair that he slew himself. And perhaps it had been better if the Athenian general, Nicias, had been eased of his folly the same way that Midas and Aristodemus were, than for him to sit still for fear of a lunar eclipse, while he was invested by an enemy, and so be himself made a prisoner, together with an army of forty thousand men (that were all either slain or taken), and die ingloriously. There was nothing formidable in the interposition of the earth betwixt the sun and the moon, neither was there any thing dreadful in the shadow’s meeting the moon at the proper time: no, the dreadfulness lay here, that the darkness of ignorance should blind and befool a man’s reason at a time when he had most occasion to use it.
 Glaucus, behold!
 The sea with billows deep begins to roll;
  The seas begin in azure rods to lie;
 A teeming cloud of pitch hangs on the sky
 Right o’er Gyre rocks; there is a tempest nigh;
which as soon as the pilot sees, he falls to his prayers and invokes his tutelar daemons, but neglects not in the mean time to hold to the rudder and let down the mainyard; and so,
 By gathering in his sails, with mighty pain,
 Escapes the hell-pits of the raging main.
Hesiod directs his husbandman, before he either plough or sow, to pray to the infernal Jove and the venerable Ceres, but with his hand upon the plough-tail. Homer acquaints us how Ajax, being to engage in a single combat with Hector, bade the Grecians pray to the Gods for him; and while they were at their devotions, he was putting on his armor. Likewise, after Agamemnon had thus prepared his soldiers for the fight, —
 Each make his spear to glitter as the sun,
 Each see his warlike target well hung on, —
he then prayed, —
 Grant me, great Jove, to throw down Priam’s roof.
For God is the brave man’s hope, and not the coward’s excuse. The Jews indeed once sat on their tails,—it being forsooth their Sabbath day,—and suffered their enemies to rear their scaling-ladders and make themselves masters of their walls, and so lay still until they were caught like so many trout in the drag-net of their own superstition. [9]Such then is the behavior of superstition in times of adversity, and in things out of the power of man’s will. Nor doth it a jot excel atheism in the more agreeable and pleasurable part of our lives. Now what we esteem the most agreeable things in human life are our holidays, temple-feasts, initiatings, processionings, with our public prayers and solemn devotions. Mark we now the atheist’s behavior here. ’Tis true, he laughs at all that is done, with a frantic and sardonic laughter, and now and then whispers to a confidant of his, The devil is in these people sure, that can imagine God can be taken with these fooleries: but this is the worst of his disasters. But now the superstitious man would fain be pleasant and gay, but cannot for his heart. The whole town is filled with odors of incense and perfumes, and at the same time a mixture of hymns and sighs fills his poor soul. He looks pale with a garland on his head, he sacrifices and fears, prays with a faltering tongue, and offers incense with a trembling hand. In a word, he utterly baffles that saying, of Pythagoras, that we are then best when we come near the Gods. For the superstitious person is then in his worst and most pitiful condition, when he approaches the shrines and temples of the Gods. [10]So that I cannot but wonder at those that charge atheism with impiety, and in the mean time acquit superstition. Anaxagoras was indicted of blasphemy for having affirmed the sun to be a red-hot stone; yet the Cimmerians were never much blamed for denying his being. What? Is he that holds there is no God guilty of impiety, and is not he that describes him as the superstitious do much more guilty? I, for my own part, had much rather people should say of me, that there neither is nor ever was such a man as Plutarch, than they should say: „Plutarch is an unsteady, fickle, froward, vindictive, and touchy fellow; if you invite others to sup with you, and chance to leave out Plutarch, or if some business falls out that you cannot wait at his door with the morning salute, or if when you meet with him you don’t speak to him, he’ll fasten upon you somewhere with his teeth and bite the part through, or catch one of your children and cane him, or turn his beast into your corn and spoil your crop.’ When Timotheus the musician was one day singing at Athens an hymn to Diana, in which among other things was this, —
 Mad, raving, tearing, foaming Deity, —
Cinesias, the lyric poet, stood up from the midst of the spectators, and spoke aloud: I wish thee with all my heart such a Goddess to thy daughter, Timotheus. Such like, nay worse, are the conceits of the superstitious about this Goddess Diana: —
 Thou dost on the bed-clothes jump,
 And there liest like a lump.
  Thou dost tantalize the bride,
 When love’s charms by thee are tied.
 Thou look’st grim and full of dread,
 When thou walk’st to find the dead.
 Thou down chairs and tables rumbl’st,
 When with Oberon thou tumbl’st.
Nor have they any milder sentiments of Apollo, Juno, or Venus; for they are equally scared with them all. Alas! what could poor Niobe ever say that could be so reflecting upon the honor of Latona, as that which superstition makes fools believe of her? Niobe, it seems, had given her some hard words, for which she fairly shot her
 Six daughters, and six sons full in their prime;
so impatient was she, and insatiate with the calamities of another. Now if the Goddess was really thus choleric and vindictive and so highly incensed with bad language, and if she had not the wisdom to smile at human frailty and ignorance, but suffered herself to be thus transported with passion, I much marvel she did not shoot them too that told this cruel story of her, and charged her both in speech and writing with so much spleen and rancor. We oft accuse Queen Hecuba of barbarous and savage bitterness, for having once said in Homer, —
 Would God I had his liver ’twixt my teeth;
yet the superstitious believe, if a man taste of a minnow or bleak, the Syrian Goddess will eat his shins through, fill his body with sores, and dissolve his liver. [11]Is it a sin then to speak amiss of the Gods, and is it not to think amiss of them? And is not thinking the cause of speaking ill? For the only reason of our dislike to detraction is that we look upon it as a token of ill-will to us; and we therefore take those for our enemies that misrepresent us, because we look upon them as untrusty. and disaffected. You see then what the superstitious think of the divinity, while they fancy the Gods such heady, faithless, fickle, revengeful, cruel, and fretful things. The consequence of which is that the superstitious person must needs both fear and hate them at once. And indeed, how can he otherwise choose, while he thinks the greatest calamities he either doth now or must hereafter undergo are wholly owing to them? Now he that both hates and fears the Gods must of necessity be their enemy. And if he trembles, fears, prostrates, sacrifices, and sits perpetually in their temples, that is no marvel at all. For the very worst of tyrants are complimented and attended, yea, have statues of gold erected to them, by those who in private hate them and wag their heads. Hermolaus waited on Alexander, and Pausanias was of Philip’s guard, and so was Chaerea of Caligula’s; yet every one of these said, I warrant you, in his heart as he went along, —
 Had I a power as my will is good,
  Know this, bold tyrant, I would have thy blood.
The atheist believes there are no Gods; the superstitious would have none, but is a believer against his will, and would be an infidel if he durst. He would be as glad to ease himself of the burthen of his fear, as Tantalus would be to slip his head from under the great stone that hangs over him, and would bless the condition of the atheist as absolute freedom, compared with his own. The atheist now has nothing to do with superstition; while the superstitious is an atheist in his heart, but is too much a coward to think as he is inclined. [12]Moreover, atheism hath no hand at all in causing superstition; but superstition not only gave atheism its first birth, but serves it ever since by giving it its best apology for existing, which, although it be neither a good nor a fair one, is yet the most specious and colorable. For men were not at first made atheists by any fault they found in the heavens or stars, or in the seasons of the year, or in those revolutions or motions of the sun about the earth that make the day and night; nor yet by observing any mistake or disorder either in the breeding of animals or the production of fruits. No, it was the uncouth actions and ridiculous and senseless passions of superstition, her canting words, her foolish gestures, her charms, her magic, her freakish processions, her taborings, her foul expiations, her vile methods of purgation, and her barbarous and inhuman penances, and bemirings at the temples,—it was these, I say, that gave occasion to many to affirm, it would be far happier there were no Gods at all than for them to be pleased and delighted with such fantastic toys, and to thus abuse their votaries, and to be incensed and pacified with trifles. [13]Had it not been much better for the so much famed Gauls and Scythians to have neither thought nor imagined nor heard any thing of their Gods, than to have believed them such as would be pleased with the blood of human sacrifices, and would account such for the most complete and meritorious of expiations? How much better had it been for the Carthaginians to have had either a Critias or a Diagoras for their first lawmaker, that so they might have believed in neither God nor spirits, than to make such offerings to Saturn as they made?—not such as Empedocles speaks of, where he thus touches the sacrifices of beasts: —
 The sire lifts up his dear beloved son,
 Who first some other form and shape did take;
 He doth him slay and sacrifice anon,
 And therewith vows and foolish prayers doth make.
But they knowingly and wittingly themselves devoted their own children; and they that had none of their own bought of some poor people, and then sacrificed them like lambs or pigeons, the poor mother standing by the while without either a sigh or tear; and if by chance she fetched a sigh or let fall a tear, she lost the price of her child, but it was nevertheless sacrificed. All the places round the image were in the mean time filled with the noise of hautboys and tabors, to drown the poor infants’ crying. Suppose we now the Typhons and Giants should depose the Gods and make themselves masters of mankind, what sort of sacrifices, think you, would they expect? Or what other expiations would they require? The queen of King Xerxes, Amestris, buried twelve men alive, as a sacrifice to Pluto to prolong her own life; and yet Plato saith, This God is called in Greek Hades, because he is placid, wise, and wealthy, and retains the souls of men by persuasion and oratory. That great naturalist Xenophanes, seeing the Egyptians beating their breasts and lamenting at the solemn times of their devotions, gave them this pertinent and seasonable admonition: If they are Gods (said he), don’t cry for them; and if they are men, don’t sacrifice to them. [14]There is certainly no infirmity belonging to us that contains such a multiplicity of errors and fond passions, or that consists of such incongruous and incoherent opinions, as this of superstition doth. It behooves us therefore to do our utmost to escape it; but withal, we must see we do it safely and prudently, and not rashly and inconsiderately, as people run from the incursions of robbers or from fire, and fall into bewildered and untrodden paths full of pits and precipices. For so some, while they would avoid superstition, leap over the golden mean of true piety into the harsh and coarse extreme of atheism.
— Plutarch’s Morals. Translated from the Greek by several hands. Corrected and revised by William W. Goodwin. Cambridge: Little, Brown, and Company, 1874.