Hanegraaff6 has argued that The True Word was written shortly after the death of Justin Martyr (who was possibly the first Christian apologist), and was probably a response to his work.6 Origen stated that Celsus was from the first half of the 2nd century AD, although the majority of modern scholars have come to a general consensus that Celsus probably wrote around AD 170 to 180.
This page is based on “Celsus” from English Wikipedia, (r1368079032) CC BY-SA 4.0 used under the license. The original authors are listed in its page history.
All that is known about Celsus himself comes from the surviving text of his book and from what Origen says about him.9 Although Origen initially refers to Celsus as an Epicurean,101112 his arguments reflect ideas of the Platonic tradition, rather than Epicureanism.101312 Origen attributes this to Celsus's inconsistency,10 but modern historians see it instead as evidence that Celsus was not an Epicurean at all.1011 Joseph Wilson Trigg states that Origen probably confused Celsus, the author of The True Word, with a different Celsus, who was an Epicurean philosopher and a friend of the Syrian satirist Lucian.11 Celsus the Epicurean must have lived around the same time as the author of The True Word and he is mentioned by Lucian in his treatise On Magic.11 Both Celsus the friend of Lucian and Celsus the author of The True Word evidently shared a passionate zeal against superstitio, making it easy to see how Origen could have concluded that they were the same person.11
Stephen Thomas states that Celsus may not have been a Platonist per se,10 but that he was clearly familiar with Plato.10 Celsus's actual philosophy appears to be a blend of elements derived from Platonism, Aristotelianism, Pythagoreanism, and Stoicism.10 Wilken likewise concludes that Celsus was a philosophical eclectic, whose views reflect a variety of ideas popular to a number of different schools.14 Wilken classifies Celsus as "a conservative intellectual", noting that "he supports traditional values and defends accepted beliefs".14 Theologian Robert M. Grant notes that Origen and Celsus actually agree on many points:15 "Both are opposed to anthropotheism, to idolatry, and to any crudely literal theology."15 Celsus also writes as a loyal citizen of the Roman Empire and a devoted believer in the ancient Greek religion and the religion in ancient Rome, distrustful of Christianity as new and foreign.16
Thomas remarks that Celsus "is no genius as a philosopher".10 Nonetheless, most scholars, including Thomas, agree that Origen's quotations from The True Word reveal that the work was well-researched.17181316 Celsus demonstrates extensive knowledge of both the Old and New Testaments101316 and of both Jewish and Christian history.1316 Celsus was also closely familiar with the literary features of ancient polemics.16 Celsus seems to have read at least one work by one of the second-century Christian apologists, possibly Justin Martyr or Aristides of Athens.1920 From this reading, Celsus seems to have known which kinds of arguments Christians would be most vulnerable to.20 He also mentions the Ophites and Simonians, two Gnostic sects that had almost completely vanished by Origen's time.19 One of Celsus's main sources for Books I–II of The True Word was an earlier anti-Christian polemic written by an unknown Jewish author,1610 whom Origen refers to as the "Jew of Celsus".10 This Jewish source also provides well-researched criticism of Christianity16 and, although Celsus was also hostile to Judaism,16 he occasionally relies on this Jewish author's arguments,16 to demonstrate the inconsistency of the Christian position, and he also uses Christian arguments among others to deconstruct the Jewish religion.
Work
Celsus was the author of a work titled The True Word (Logos Alēthēs). The argument was contested by the contemporary Christian community and the book was eventually banned in 448 AD by order of Valentinian III and Theodosius II, along with Porphyry's 15 books attacking the Christians, The Philosophy from Oracles. No complete copies are extant,45 but it can be reconstructed from Origen's detailed account of it in his eight volume refutation, which quotes Celsus extensively.48 Origen's work has survived and has thereby preserved Celsus's work.21
Celsus seems to have been interested in Ancient Egyptian religion,22 and he seemed to know of Hellenistic Jewish logos-theology, both of which suggest The True Doctrine was composed in Alexandria.23 Origen indicates that Celsus was an Epicurean living under the Emperor Hadrian.2425
Celsus writes that "there is an ancient doctrine [archaios logos] which has existed from the beginning, which has always been maintained by the wisest nations and cities and wise men". He leaves Jews and Moses out of those he cites (Egyptians, Syrians, Indians, Persians, Odrysians, Samothracians, Eleusinians, Hyperboreans, Galactophagoi, Druids, and Getae), and instead blames Moses for the corruption of the ancient religion. "The goatherds and shepherds who followed Moses as their leader were deluded by clumsy deceits into thinking that there was only one God, [and] without any rational cause ... these goatherds and shepherds abandoned the worship of many gods". However, Celsus's harshest criticism was reserved for Christians, who "wall themselves off and break away from the rest of mankind".6
Celsus initiated a critical attack on Christianity, ridiculing many of its dogmas. He wrote that some Jews said Jesus's father was actually a Roman soldier named Pantera. Origen considered this a fabricated story.2627 In addition, Celsus addressed the miracles of Jesus, holding that "Jesus performed his miracles by sorcery (γοητεία)":282930
O light and truth! he distinctly declares, with his own voice, as ye yourselves have recorded, that there will come to you even others, employing miracles of a similar kind, who are wicked men, and sorcerers; and Satan. So that Jesus himself does not deny that these works at least are not at all divine, but are the acts of wicked men; and being compelled by the force of truth, he at the same time not only laid open the doings of others, but convicted himself of the same acts. Is it not, then, a miserable inference, to conclude from the same works that the one is God and the other sorcerers? Why ought the others, because of these acts, to be accounted wicked rather than this man, seeing they have him as their witness against himself? For he has himself acknowledged that these are not the works of a divine nature, but the inventions of certain deceivers, and of thoroughly wicked men.3132
Origen wrote his refutation in 248, and it includes quotes, paraphrases, and references to Celsus's arguments. Since accuracy was essential to his refutation of The True Doctrine,33 most scholars agree that Origen is a reliable source for what Celsus wrote.3435
Biblical scholar Arthur J. Droge has written that it is incorrect to refer to Celsus's perspective as polytheism. Instead, he was a henotheist, as opposed to the Jewish strict monotheism;6 historian Wouter Hanegraaff explains that "the former has room for a hierarchy of lower deities which do not detract from the ultimate unity of the One."36 Celsus shows himself familiar with the story of Jewish origins.37 Conceding that Christians are not without success in business (infructuosi in negotiis), Celsus wants them to be good citizens, to retain their own belief but worship the emperors and join their fellow citizens in defending the empire.38 This appeal on behalf of unity and mutual toleration nevertheless centers on submission to the state and military service. One of Celsus's bitterest complaints is that Christians refused to cooperate with civil society and held local customs and the ancient religions in contempt. The Christians viewed these as idolatrous and inspired by evil spirits, whereas polytheists like Celsus thought of them as the works of the Daemons, or the god's ministers, who ruled mankind in his place to keep him from the pollution of mortality.39 Celsus attacks the Christians as feeding off faction and disunity, and accuses them of converting the vulgar and ignorant, while refusing to debate wise men.40 As for their opinions regarding their sacred mission and exclusive holiness, Celsus responds by deriding their insignificance, comparing them to a swarm of bats, or ants creeping out of their nest, or frogs holding a symposium round a swamp, or worms in conventicle in a corner of the mud.41 It is not known how many were Christians at the time of Celsus (the Jewish population of the empire may have been about 6.6–10% in a population of 60 million to quote one reference).42
References
Bibliography
Grant, Robert M. (1967), "Origen", in Edwards, Paul (ed.), The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, vol. 5, New York City, New York: The MacMillan Company & The Free Press, pp. 551–552, OCLC174214019
Gregerman, Adam (2016), "Origen's Contra Celsum", Building on the Ruins of the Temple, Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism, vol. 165, Tübingen, Germany: Mohr Siebeck, pp. 59–96, ISBN 978-3-16154-322-7
Heine, Ronald E. (3 May 2004), "The Alexandrians", in Young, Francis; Ayres, Lewis; Louth, Andrew; Casiday, Augustine (eds.), The Cambridge History of Early Christian Literature, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, pp. 117–130, ISBN 978-0-521-46083-5
Marcovich, M. (2001), "Preface", Contra Celsum: Libri VIII, Leiden, The Netherlands, Boston, Massachusetts, and Köln, Germany: Brill, ISBN 9004119760
McGuckin, John Anthony (2004), "The Scholarly Works of Origen", in McGuckin, John Anthony (ed.), The Westminster Handbook to Origen, Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, pp. 25–44, ISBN 978-0-66422-472-1
Somos, Róbert (2015), Fürst, Alfons (ed.), Logic and Argumentation in Origen, Adamantiana: Texte und Studien zu Origines und seinem Erbe, vol. 7, Münster, Germany: Aschendorff Verlag, ISBN 978-3-40213-717-8
Thomas, Stephen (2004), "Celsus", in McGuckin, John Anthony (ed.), The Westminster Handbook to Origen, Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, pp. 72–73, ISBN 978-0-66422-472-1
Trigg, Joseph Wilson (1983), Origen: The Bible and Philosophy in the Third-Century Church, Atlanta, Georgia: John Knox Press, ISBN 978-0-80420-945-8
Wilken, Robert Louis (2003) [1984], The Christians as the Romans Saw Them, New Haven, Connecticut and London, England: Yale University Press, ISBN 978-0-30009-839-6
Sources
Nixey, Catherine (2017). The Darkening Age: The Christian Destruction of the Classical World. London, UK: Macmillan. ISBN 978-1-5098-1606-4.
Hanegraaff, Wouter (2012). Esotericism and the Academy: Rejected Knowledge in Western Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521196215.
Des Origenes Acht Bücher gegen Celsus. Übersetzt von Paul Koetschau. Josef Kösel Verlag. München. 1927.
Celsus: Gegen die Christen. Übersetzt von Th. Keim (1873) [Celsus' wahres Wort], Reprint Matthes & Seitz, München 1991 (ISBN 3-88221-350-7)
Horacio E. Lona, Die »Wahre Lehre« des Kelsos. Übersetzt und erklärt. Kommentar zu frühchristlichen Apologeten, supplementary volume 1. Freiburg: Herder, 2005, ISBN 3-451-28599-1.
B. A. Zuiddam, "Old Critics and Modern Theology", Dutch Reformed Theological Journal (South Africa), part xxxvi, number 2, June 1995.
Stephen Goranson, "Celsus of Pergamum: Locating a Critic of Early Christianity", in D. R. Edwards and C. T. McCollough (eds), The Archaeology of Difference: Gender, Ethnicity, Class and the "Other" in Antiquity: Studies in Honor of Eric M. Meyers (Boston: American Schools of Oriental Research, 2007) (Information Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research, 60/61).
Chadwick, H., Origen: Contra Celsum, CUP (1965), p. xxviii. The arguments for the date depend on factors such as the state of the art of gnosticism, possible references to the Augusti, appeals to defense against barbarian invasion, and the possibility of identifying the persecution described by Celsus with a historical one. ↩↩2
Chadwick, H. Origen: Contra Celsum, introduction. ↩
Contra Celsum by Origen, Henry Chadwick, 1980, ISBN 0-521-29576-9, page 32 ↩
Patrick, John, The Apology of Origen in Reply to Celsus, 2009, ISBN 1-110-13388-X, pages 22–24, ↩
Hendrik van der Loos (1965). The Miracles of Jesus. Brill Publishers. Retrieved 14 June 2012. According to Celsus Jesus performed His miracles by sorcery (γοητεία); ditto in II, 14; II, 16; II, 44; II, 48; II, 49 (Celsus puts Jesus' miraculous signs on a par with those among men). ↩
Margaret Y. MacDonald (3 October 1996). Early Christian Women and Pagan Opinion. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521567282. Retrieved 14 June 2012. Celsus calls Jesus a sorcerer. He argues that the miracles of Jesus are on the same level as: 'the works of sorcerers who profess to do wonderful miracles, and the accomplishments of those who are taught by the Egyptians, who for a few obols make known their sacred lore in the middle of the market-place and drive daemons out of men and blow away diseases and invoke the souls of heroes, displaying expensive banquets and dining tables and cakes and dishes which are non-existent, and who make things move as though they were alive although they are not really so, but only appear as such in the imagination.' ↩
Philip Francis Esler (2000). The Early Christian World, Volume 2. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 9780415164979. Retrieved 14 June 2012. To disprove the deity of Christ required an explanation of his miracles which were recorded in scripture. Celsus does not deny the fact of Jesus' miracles, but rather concentrates on the means by which they were performed. Perhaps influenced by rabbinical sources, Celsus attributes Jesus' miracles to his great skills as a magician. ↩
Ernest Cushing Richardson, Bernhard Pick (1905). The Ante-Nicene fathers: translations of the writings of the fathers down to A.D. 325, Volume 4. Scribner's. Retrieved 14 June 2012. But Celsus, wishing to assimilate the miracles of Jesus to the works of human sorcery, says in express terms as follows: "O light and truth! he distinctly declares, with his own voice, as ye yourselves have recorded, that there will come to you even others, employing miracles of a similar kind, who are wicked men, and sorcerers; and Satan. So that Jesus himself does not deny that these works at least are not at all divine, but are the acts of wicked men; and being compelled by the force of truth, he at the same time not only laid open the doings of others, but convicted himself of the same acts. Is it not, then, a miserable inference, to conclude from the same works that the one is God and the other sorcerers? Why ought the others, because of these acts, to be accounted wicked rather than this man, seeing they have him as their witness against himself? For he has himself acknowledged that these are not the works of a divine nature, but the inventions of certain deceivers, and of thoroughly wicked men." ↩
Origen (30 June 2004). Origen Against Celsus, Volume 2. Kessinger Publishing. ISBN 9781419139161. Retrieved 14 June 2012. But Celsus, wishing to assimilate the miracles of Jesus to the works of human sorcery, says in express terms as follows: "O light and truth! he distinctly declares, with his own voice, as ye yourselves have recorded, that there will come to you even others, employing miracles of a similar kind, who are wicked men, and sorcerers; and he calls him who makes use of such devices, one Satan. So that Jesus himself does not deny that these works at least are not at all divine, but are the acts of wicked men; and being compelled by the force of truth, he at the same time not only laid open the doings of others, but convicted himself of the same acts. Is it not, then, a miserable inference, to conclude from the same works that the one is God and the other sorcerers? Why ought the others, because of these acts, to be accounted wicked rather than this man, seeing they have him as their witness against himself? For he has himself acknowledged that these are not the works of a divine nature; but the inventions of certain deceivers, and of thoroughly wicked men." ↩
James D. Tabor, The Jesus Dynasty: The Hidden History of Jesus, His Royal Family, and the Birth of Christianity, Simon and Schuster, 2006. p 64 ↩
David Brewster & Richard R. Yeo, The Edinburgh Encyclopaedia, Volume 8, Routledge, 1999. p 362 ↩
Martin, Dale B. (2004). Inventing Superstition: From the Hippocratics to the Christians. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. pp. 141, 143. ISBN 0-674-01534-7. ↩
Terrot Reavely Glover, The Conflict Of Religions In The Early Roman Empire, (Methuen & Co., 1910 [Kindle Edition]), chap. VIII., p. 431 ↩
Hanegraaff6 has argued that The True Word was written shortly after the death of Justin Martyr (who was possibly the first Christian apologist), and was probably a response to his work.6 Origen stated that Celsus was from the first half of the 2nd century AD, although the majority of modern scholars have come to a general consensus that Celsus probably wrote around AD 170 to 180.
All that is known about Celsus himself comes from the surviving text of his book and from what Origen says about him.9 Although Origen initially refers to Celsus as an Epicurean,101112 his arguments reflect ideas of the Platonic tradition, rather than Epicureanism.101312 Origen attributes this to Celsus's inconsistency,10 but modern historians see it instead as evidence that Celsus was not an Epicurean at all.1011 Joseph Wilson Trigg states that Origen probably confused Celsus, the author of The True Word, with a different Celsus, who was an Epicurean philosopher and a friend of the Syrian satirist Lucian.11 Celsus the Epicurean must have lived around the same time as the author of The True Word and he is mentioned by Lucian in his treatise On Magic.11 Both Celsus the friend of Lucian and Celsus the author of The True Word evidently shared a passionate zeal against superstitio, making it easy to see how Origen could have concluded that they were the same person.11
Stephen Thomas states that Celsus may not have been a Platonist per se,10 but that he was clearly familiar with Plato.10 Celsus's actual philosophy appears to be a blend of elements derived from Platonism, Aristotelianism, Pythagoreanism, and Stoicism.10 Wilken likewise concludes that Celsus was a philosophical eclectic, whose views reflect a variety of ideas popular to a number of different schools.14 Wilken classifies Celsus as "a conservative intellectual", noting that "he supports traditional values and defends accepted beliefs".14 Theologian Robert M. Grant notes that Origen and Celsus actually agree on many points:15 "Both are opposed to anthropotheism, to idolatry, and to any crudely literal theology."15 Celsus also writes as a loyal citizen of the Roman Empire and a devoted believer in the ancient Greek religion and the religion in ancient Rome, distrustful of Christianity as new and foreign.16
Thomas remarks that Celsus "is no genius as a philosopher".10 Nonetheless, most scholars, including Thomas, agree that Origen's quotations from The True Word reveal that the work was well-researched.17181316 Celsus demonstrates extensive knowledge of both the Old and New Testaments101316 and of both Jewish and Christian history.1316 Celsus was also closely familiar with the literary features of ancient polemics.16 Celsus seems to have read at least one work by one of the second-century Christian apologists, possibly Justin Martyr or Aristides of Athens.1920 From this reading, Celsus seems to have known which kinds of arguments Christians would be most vulnerable to.20 He also mentions the Ophites and Simonians, two Gnostic sects that had almost completely vanished by Origen's time.19 One of Celsus's main sources for Books I–II of The True Word was an earlier anti-Christian polemic written by an unknown Jewish author,1610 whom Origen refers to as the "Jew of Celsus".10 This Jewish source also provides well-researched criticism of Christianity16 and, although Celsus was also hostile to Judaism,16 he occasionally relies on this Jewish author's arguments,16 to demonstrate the inconsistency of the Christian position, and he also uses Christian arguments among others to deconstruct the Jewish religion.
Work
Celsus was the author of a work titled The True Word (Logos Alēthēs). The argument was contested by the contemporary Christian community and the book was eventually banned in 448 AD by order of Valentinian III and Theodosius II, along with Porphyry's 15 books attacking the Christians, The Philosophy from Oracles. No complete copies are extant,45 but it can be reconstructed from Origen's detailed account of it in his eight volume refutation, which quotes Celsus extensively.48 Origen's work has survived and has thereby preserved Celsus's work.21
Celsus seems to have been interested in Ancient Egyptian religion,22 and he seemed to know of Hellenistic Jewish logos-theology, both of which suggest The True Doctrine was composed in Alexandria.23 Origen indicates that Celsus was an Epicurean living under the Emperor Hadrian.2425
Celsus writes that "there is an ancient doctrine [archaios logos] which has existed from the beginning, which has always been maintained by the wisest nations and cities and wise men". He leaves Jews and Moses out of those he cites (Egyptians, Syrians, Indians, Persians, Odrysians, Samothracians, Eleusinians, Hyperboreans, Galactophagoi, Druids, and Getae), and instead blames Moses for the corruption of the ancient religion. "The goatherds and shepherds who followed Moses as their leader were deluded by clumsy deceits into thinking that there was only one God, [and] without any rational cause ... these goatherds and shepherds abandoned the worship of many gods". However, Celsus's harshest criticism was reserved for Christians, who "wall themselves off and break away from the rest of mankind".6
Celsus initiated a critical attack on Christianity, ridiculing many of its dogmas. He wrote that some Jews said Jesus's father was actually a Roman soldier named Pantera. Origen considered this a fabricated story.2627 In addition, Celsus addressed the miracles of Jesus, holding that "Jesus performed his miracles by sorcery (γοητεία)":282930
O light and truth! he distinctly declares, with his own voice, as ye yourselves have recorded, that there will come to you even others, employing miracles of a similar kind, who are wicked men, and sorcerers; and Satan. So that Jesus himself does not deny that these works at least are not at all divine, but are the acts of wicked men; and being compelled by the force of truth, he at the same time not only laid open the doings of others, but convicted himself of the same acts. Is it not, then, a miserable inference, to conclude from the same works that the one is God and the other sorcerers? Why ought the others, because of these acts, to be accounted wicked rather than this man, seeing they have him as their witness against himself? For he has himself acknowledged that these are not the works of a divine nature, but the inventions of certain deceivers, and of thoroughly wicked men.3132
Origen wrote his refutation in 248, and it includes quotes, paraphrases, and references to Celsus's arguments. Since accuracy was essential to his refutation of The True Doctrine,33 most scholars agree that Origen is a reliable source for what Celsus wrote.3435
Biblical scholar Arthur J. Droge has written that it is incorrect to refer to Celsus's perspective as polytheism. Instead, he was a henotheist, as opposed to the Jewish strict monotheism;6 historian Wouter Hanegraaff explains that "the former has room for a hierarchy of lower deities which do not detract from the ultimate unity of the One."36 Celsus shows himself familiar with the story of Jewish origins.37 Conceding that Christians are not without success in business (infructuosi in negotiis), Celsus wants them to be good citizens, to retain their own belief but worship the emperors and join their fellow citizens in defending the empire.38 This appeal on behalf of unity and mutual toleration nevertheless centers on submission to the state and military service. One of Celsus's bitterest complaints is that Christians refused to cooperate with civil society and held local customs and the ancient religions in contempt. The Christians viewed these as idolatrous and inspired by evil spirits, whereas polytheists like Celsus thought of them as the works of the Daemons, or the god's ministers, who ruled mankind in his place to keep him from the pollution of mortality.39 Celsus attacks the Christians as feeding off faction and disunity, and accuses them of converting the vulgar and ignorant, while refusing to debate wise men.40 As for their opinions regarding their sacred mission and exclusive holiness, Celsus responds by deriding their insignificance, comparing them to a swarm of bats, or ants creeping out of their nest, or frogs holding a symposium round a swamp, or worms in conventicle in a corner of the mud.41 It is not known how many were Christians at the time of Celsus (the Jewish population of the empire may have been about 6.6–10% in a population of 60 million to quote one reference).42
References
Bibliography
Grant, Robert M. (1967), "Origen", in Edwards, Paul (ed.), The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, vol. 5, New York City, New York: The MacMillan Company & The Free Press, pp. 551–552, OCLC174214019
Gregerman, Adam (2016), "Origen's Contra Celsum", Building on the Ruins of the Temple, Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism, vol. 165, Tübingen, Germany: Mohr Siebeck, pp. 59–96, ISBN 978-3-16154-322-7
Heine, Ronald E. (3 May 2004), "The Alexandrians", in Young, Francis; Ayres, Lewis; Louth, Andrew; Casiday, Augustine (eds.), The Cambridge History of Early Christian Literature, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, pp. 117–130, ISBN 978-0-521-46083-5
Marcovich, M. (2001), "Preface", Contra Celsum: Libri VIII, Leiden, The Netherlands, Boston, Massachusetts, and Köln, Germany: Brill, ISBN 9004119760
McGuckin, John Anthony (2004), "The Scholarly Works of Origen", in McGuckin, John Anthony (ed.), The Westminster Handbook to Origen, Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, pp. 25–44, ISBN 978-0-66422-472-1
Somos, Róbert (2015), Fürst, Alfons (ed.), Logic and Argumentation in Origen, Adamantiana: Texte und Studien zu Origines und seinem Erbe, vol. 7, Münster, Germany: Aschendorff Verlag, ISBN 978-3-40213-717-8
Thomas, Stephen (2004), "Celsus", in McGuckin, John Anthony (ed.), The Westminster Handbook to Origen, Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, pp. 72–73, ISBN 978-0-66422-472-1
Trigg, Joseph Wilson (1983), Origen: The Bible and Philosophy in the Third-Century Church, Atlanta, Georgia: John Knox Press, ISBN 978-0-80420-945-8
Wilken, Robert Louis (2003) [1984], The Christians as the Romans Saw Them, New Haven, Connecticut and London, England: Yale University Press, ISBN 978-0-30009-839-6
Sources
Nixey, Catherine (2017). The Darkening Age: The Christian Destruction of the Classical World. London, UK: Macmillan. ISBN 978-1-5098-1606-4.
Hanegraaff, Wouter (2012). Esotericism and the Academy: Rejected Knowledge in Western Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521196215.
Des Origenes Acht Bücher gegen Celsus. Übersetzt von Paul Koetschau. Josef Kösel Verlag. München. 1927.
Celsus: Gegen die Christen. Übersetzt von Th. Keim (1873) [Celsus' wahres Wort], Reprint Matthes & Seitz, München 1991 (ISBN 3-88221-350-7)
Horacio E. Lona, Die »Wahre Lehre« des Kelsos. Übersetzt und erklärt. Kommentar zu frühchristlichen Apologeten, supplementary volume 1. Freiburg: Herder, 2005, ISBN 3-451-28599-1.
B. A. Zuiddam, "Old Critics and Modern Theology", Dutch Reformed Theological Journal (South Africa), part xxxvi, number 2, June 1995.
Stephen Goranson, "Celsus of Pergamum: Locating a Critic of Early Christianity", in D. R. Edwards and C. T. McCollough (eds), The Archaeology of Difference: Gender, Ethnicity, Class and the "Other" in Antiquity: Studies in Honor of Eric M. Meyers (Boston: American Schools of Oriental Research, 2007) (Information Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research, 60/61).
Chadwick, H., Origen: Contra Celsum, CUP (1965), p. xxviii. The arguments for the date depend on factors such as the state of the art of gnosticism, possible references to the Augusti, appeals to defense against barbarian invasion, and the possibility of identifying the persecution described by Celsus with a historical one. ↩↩2
Chadwick, H. Origen: Contra Celsum, introduction. ↩
Contra Celsum by Origen, Henry Chadwick, 1980, ISBN 0-521-29576-9, page 32 ↩
Patrick, John, The Apology of Origen in Reply to Celsus, 2009, ISBN 1-110-13388-X, pages 22–24, ↩
Hendrik van der Loos (1965). The Miracles of Jesus. Brill Publishers. Retrieved 14 June 2012. According to Celsus Jesus performed His miracles by sorcery (γοητεία); ditto in II, 14; II, 16; II, 44; II, 48; II, 49 (Celsus puts Jesus' miraculous signs on a par with those among men). ↩
Margaret Y. MacDonald (3 October 1996). Early Christian Women and Pagan Opinion. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521567282. Retrieved 14 June 2012. Celsus calls Jesus a sorcerer. He argues that the miracles of Jesus are on the same level as: 'the works of sorcerers who profess to do wonderful miracles, and the accomplishments of those who are taught by the Egyptians, who for a few obols make known their sacred lore in the middle of the market-place and drive daemons out of men and blow away diseases and invoke the souls of heroes, displaying expensive banquets and dining tables and cakes and dishes which are non-existent, and who make things move as though they were alive although they are not really so, but only appear as such in the imagination.' ↩
Philip Francis Esler (2000). The Early Christian World, Volume 2. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 9780415164979. Retrieved 14 June 2012. To disprove the deity of Christ required an explanation of his miracles which were recorded in scripture. Celsus does not deny the fact of Jesus' miracles, but rather concentrates on the means by which they were performed. Perhaps influenced by rabbinical sources, Celsus attributes Jesus' miracles to his great skills as a magician. ↩
Ernest Cushing Richardson, Bernhard Pick (1905). The Ante-Nicene fathers: translations of the writings of the fathers down to A.D. 325, Volume 4. Scribner's. Retrieved 14 June 2012. But Celsus, wishing to assimilate the miracles of Jesus to the works of human sorcery, says in express terms as follows: "O light and truth! he distinctly declares, with his own voice, as ye yourselves have recorded, that there will come to you even others, employing miracles of a similar kind, who are wicked men, and sorcerers; and Satan. So that Jesus himself does not deny that these works at least are not at all divine, but are the acts of wicked men; and being compelled by the force of truth, he at the same time not only laid open the doings of others, but convicted himself of the same acts. Is it not, then, a miserable inference, to conclude from the same works that the one is God and the other sorcerers? Why ought the others, because of these acts, to be accounted wicked rather than this man, seeing they have him as their witness against himself? For he has himself acknowledged that these are not the works of a divine nature, but the inventions of certain deceivers, and of thoroughly wicked men." ↩
Origen (30 June 2004). Origen Against Celsus, Volume 2. Kessinger Publishing. ISBN 9781419139161. Retrieved 14 June 2012. But Celsus, wishing to assimilate the miracles of Jesus to the works of human sorcery, says in express terms as follows: "O light and truth! he distinctly declares, with his own voice, as ye yourselves have recorded, that there will come to you even others, employing miracles of a similar kind, who are wicked men, and sorcerers; and he calls him who makes use of such devices, one Satan. So that Jesus himself does not deny that these works at least are not at all divine, but are the acts of wicked men; and being compelled by the force of truth, he at the same time not only laid open the doings of others, but convicted himself of the same acts. Is it not, then, a miserable inference, to conclude from the same works that the one is God and the other sorcerers? Why ought the others, because of these acts, to be accounted wicked rather than this man, seeing they have him as their witness against himself? For he has himself acknowledged that these are not the works of a divine nature; but the inventions of certain deceivers, and of thoroughly wicked men." ↩
James D. Tabor, The Jesus Dynasty: The Hidden History of Jesus, His Royal Family, and the Birth of Christianity, Simon and Schuster, 2006. p 64 ↩
David Brewster & Richard R. Yeo, The Edinburgh Encyclopaedia, Volume 8, Routledge, 1999. p 362 ↩
Martin, Dale B. (2004). Inventing Superstition: From the Hippocratics to the Christians. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. pp. 141, 143. ISBN 0-674-01534-7. ↩
Terrot Reavely Glover, The Conflict Of Religions In The Early Roman Empire, (Methuen & Co., 1910 [Kindle Edition]), chap. VIII., p. 431 ↩