Celsus was a second-century eclectic of Platonism. In Contra Celsum, Origen reveals in his attempt to reproduce and refute him in his eight-volume work and the mysteries of Mithra, that Celsus adopts a septenary system. The obscure treatise of Celsus was written around 177 CE titled Logos Alēthēs or True Doctrine (Ἀληθὴς Λόγος), but like Porphyry’s fifteen-volume book The Philosophy from Oracles, both were eventually banned in 448 CE by order of Valentinian III and Theodosius II. The True Doctrine questions the coherence of Christian theology by thoroughly dismantling Christian beliefs as contradictory, illogical and pernicious — and not merely as dangerous to the state.
Celsus teaches the same as Theosophy, 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. Likewise, H.P. Blavatsky writes in the Theosophical Glossary, that “The “‘secret doctrine’ is the general name given to the esoteric teaching of antiquity.” Celsus, citing and including in this: the Egyptians, Syrians, Indians, Persians, Odrysians, Samothracians, Eleusinians, Hyperboreans, Galactophagoi, Druids, and Getae, however excludes Moses, blaming him for corrupting the ancient religion.
In this excerpt, Celsus compares the Christian doctrines to the ancient Greek religion, detailing the nascent religion desperate to increase converts at the time. Celsus leads us to study these worships and communities he references and compares to Christian theology — invalidating the belief in the so-called “Uniqueness of Christ.”
“Celsus’s philosophy invites us to reject fear-based dogma and embrace a rational, compassionate approach to understanding the divine. In doing so, we honor not only the legacy of Celsus but also the potential for human beings to rise above superstition and embrace the light of reason.”
BISHOP RAY TAYLOR, CELSUS AND HIS CRITIQUE OF CHRISTIANITY: A SCHOLARLY ANALYSIS
⚵
EXCERPT FROM CHAPTER CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE COMPARED TO THAT OF THE GREEKS, pp. 69-731
“I WONDER THAT CHRISTIANS AND JEWS ARGUE SO FOOLISHLY WITH ONE ANOTHER — their contest over whether Jesus was or was not the Messiah reminding me rather of the proverb about the shadow of an ass. In fact, there is really nothing of significance in their dispute: both maintain the quite non-sensical notion that a divine savior was prophesied long ago and would come to dwell among men. All they disagree on is whether he has come or not. The Christians say yes, and cite the miracles of Jesus as proof of his identity. The Jews say that any sorcerer could put forward such proofs, and that the circumstances of Jesus’ death prove him an imposter. I am slightly inclined to the latter view myself, since miracles and wonders have indeed occurred everywhere and in all times: Asclepias did mighty works and foretold the futures of cities that kept his cult Trikka, Epidaurus, Cos, and Pergamum; then there is Ansteas the Proconnesian, or the case of a certain Clazomennian — or of Cleomedes the Astypalean. Yet I am also bound to say that the Jews have a knack of generating such nonsense. By race, they are Egyptian-like folk, and after revolting against their Egyptian cousins and being in turn disinherited by the leaders of Egypt, they struck out on their own, only to experience the same sort of rejection from the Christian cult that arose in their midst. In both instances apostasy bred apostasy, rejection led to rejection.
“The Christians use sundry methods of persuasion, and invent a number of terrifying incentives. Above all, they have concocted an absolutely offensive doctrine of everlasting punishment and rewards, exceeding anything the philosophers could have imagined.”
CELSUS
Now the Christians are just as proud as the Jews. They profess to seek converts, but thrive on martyrdom. I rather suspect that if all men desired to become Christians, the cult would immediately shut the door to converts. At the start of their movement, they were very few in number, and unified in purpose. Since that time, they have spread all around and now number in the thousands. It is not surprising, therefore, that there are divisions among them — factions of all sorts, each wanting to have its own territory. Nor is it surprising that as these divisions have become so numerous, the various parties have taken to condemning each other, so that today they have only one thing — if that — in common: the name “Christian.” But despite their clinging proudly to their name, in most other respects they are at odds. I suppose, however, that it is more amazing that there are any points of agreement at all, given the fact their belief rests on no solid foundation. They are agreed, for instance, that outsiders are not to be trusted and that they themselves must remain perpetual apostates from the approved religions.
Now, it will be wondered how men so disparate in their beliefs can persuade others to join their ranks. The Christians use sundry methods of persuasion, and invent a number of terrifying incentives. Above all, they have concocted an absolutely offensive doctrine of everlasting punishment and rewards, exceeding anything the philosophers (who have never denied the punishment of the unrighteous or the reward of the blessed) could have imagined. I have heard that before their ceremonies, where they expand on their misunderstanding of the ancient traditions, they excite their hearers to the point of frenzy with flute music like that heard among the priests of Cybele. In the old religions of Egypt, I recall, a man would be seduced by the magnificence of the shrines — the sacred gardens, the great entrance, the temple surrounded by splendid tents, not to mention the hypnotic effect of the rites themselves, made to be swallowed by the gullible. But once inside, what did the worshiper find? A cat or a monkey; a dog, crocodile, or goat. The design of the old religion was to impress upon the initiate that he had learned a secret knowledge — that the significance of these animals was given to him and him only. But at least the religion of Egypt transcended the worship of the irrational beasts: the animals were symbols of invisible ideas and not objects of worship in themselves. The religion of the Christians is not directed at an idea but at the crucified Jesus, and this is surely no better than dog or goat worship at its worst.
The Christians ignore the good offices of the Dioscuri, of Herakles, Asclepias, and of Dionysus, and say that these men are not gods because they were humans in the first place. Yet they profess belief in a phantom god who appeared only to members of his little club, and then, so it seems, merely as a kind of ghost. Now in the case of Asclepias, many men, Greeks as well as barbarians, confess that they see him — not a mere phantom, but Asclepios himself, doing his customary good works and fore-telling the future. Or take Aristeas, who vanished from men’s sight miraculously, then appeared again, and later on visited many parts of the world and recounted his wanderings. Such was his power that even Apollo is said to have commanded the Metapontines to regard Aristeas a go? I hasten to say: nobody any longer believes in Aristeas as a god. So too with Abaris the Hyperborean who according to Herodotus carried an arrow over the whole world without stopping to eat. Yet even such power did not cause people to make him a god. And the Clazomennian whose soul is said to have left his body from time to time and wandered around on its own. A stupendous wonder indeed — yet no one thinks him a god. And Cleomedes the Astypalean: he got into a chest, shut the lid, and was not to be seen inside when it was broken to bits by those seeking to arrest him. Perhaps he vanished by some act of providence: but it is certain his vanishing did not cause the people to declare him a god.
I emphasize that the Christians worship a man who was arrested and died, after the manner of the Getae who reverence Zamolxis, or those Sicilians who worship Mopsus, the Aracarnanians who worship Amphilochus, or the Thebans who worship Amphiarus and the Lebadians who worship Trophonius. The honor they pay to Jesus is no different from the sort paid to Hadrian’s favorite boy, Antinous. Yet they brook no comparison between Jesus and the established gods, such is the effect of the faith that has blurred their judgment. For only a blind faith explains the hold that Jesus has of their imagination. For they stress that he was born a mortal-indeed, that his flesh was as corruptible as gold, silver, and stone. By birth, he shared those carnal weaknesses that the Christians themselves regard as abominable. They will have it, however, that he put aside this flesh in favor of another, and so became a god. But if apotheosis is the hallmark of divinity, why not rather Asclepias, Dionysus, or Herakles, whose stories are far more ancient? I have heard a Christian ridicule those in Crete who show tourists the tomb of Zeus, saying that these Cretans have no reason for doing what they do. It may be so; yet the Christians base their faith on one who rose from a tomb.
Even the more intelligent Christians preach these absurdities. Their injunctions are like this: “Let no one educated, no one wise, no one sensible draw near. For these abilities are thought by us to be evils. But as for anyone ignorant, anyone stupid, anyone uneducated, anyone childish, let him come boldly.” By the fact that they themselves admit that these people are worthy of their god, they show that they want and are able to convince only the foolish, dishonorable and stupid, and only slaves, women and little children.”
The American Minervan 
Leave a comment