Origen of Alexandria, Against Celsus

Even if a Jewish objector refuses to defend Ezekiel and Isaiah, we ourselves share the accounts of the heavens being opened over Jesus and of the voice heard by him, and we find parallel passages written in Ezekiel, in Isaiah, or in some other prophet. We will therefore present our argument as fully as we can. Just as a dream is believed to have appeared to many people—some visions clearer, others conveyed through riddles, announcing either divine matters or events about to happen in daily life—and this is evident to everyone who has accepted the reality of providence, so what is so absurd about the mind's ability in a dream to imprint the ruling faculty, and for that imprint to prove useful to the dreamer or to those who hear his report? And just as in a dream we receive an impression of hearing and our sensory hearing is struck, and we see through eyes—yet not the body's eyes, nor is the physical ear struck, but the ruling faculty undergoes these experiences—in the same way it is not absurd that such things happened to the prophets when they wrote that they saw paradoxical visions, heard the Lord's words, or beheld the heavens opening.

I for one do not think that the physical heaven was torn open and his body split apart so that Ezekiel could record such things. So should we not also accept a similar interpretation regarding the Savior, even if this approach stumbles those of a simpler mind who, in their great simplicity, stir up the world by tearing apart the unified body of the whole heaven? But the one who examines the matter more deeply will say that there exists a certain divine, generic sense, which only the blessed person finds—exactly as Scripture says, also in Solomon: 'you will find a divine sense' (Prov 2:5 LXX). Since this sense has distinct modes—sight, naturally able to perceive things superior to bodies, in which the cherubim and seraphim are revealed; hearing, capable of apprehending voices that do not subsist in air; taste, which partakes of the living bread that came down from heaven and gives life to the world; smell, which discerns such realities, as Paul says, 'we are the fragrance of Christ to God' (2 Cor 2:15); and touch, by which John says they 'handled the word of life' (1 John 1:1)—the blessed prophets, having found this divine sense, saw divinely, heard divinely, tasted and smelled divinely, so to speak, and were touched by the Word through faith, so that its outflow reached them and healed them. Consequently they saw what they wrote that they saw, heard what they said they heard, and underwent similar experiences, as they recorded, eating the 'scroll' given to them as a book.

In the same way Isaac 'smelled the smell of his son's garments,' which were divine, and pronounced a spiritual blessing: 'See, the smell of my son is like the smell of a field that the Lord has blessed' (Gen 27:27). Likewise Jesus 'touched' the leper to cleanse him, and I think he did so in two ways: not only removing the physical leprosy through physical touch, but also the other leprosy through his truly divine touch. Thus John testified, saying, 'I saw the Spirit descending like a dove from heaven, and it remained on him. I myself did not know him, but the one who sent me to baptize with water said to me, "He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit." And I have seen and have borne witness that this is the Son of God' (John 1:32-34). And the heavens were opened to Jesus; at that moment no one except John is recorded as having seen the heavens opened. Yet Jesus, foretelling this opening to his disciples as something they would see in the future, said, 'Truly, truly, I say to you, you will see heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man' (John 1:51). And so Paul was caught up to the third heaven, having first seen it opened, because he was a disciple of Jesus. To explain now why Paul says, 'Whether in the body or out of the body I do not know; God knows' (2 Cor 12:2) is not the task of the present moment.

I will also add to the argument the points that Celsus thinks Jesus himself spoke about the opening of the heavens and the Holy Spirit descending on him in the form of a dove at the Jordan—even though Scripture does not present this as something Jesus claimed to have seen. Celsus failed to notice that this does not accord with what Jesus said to his disciples on the mount of the vision: 'Tell no one the vision until the Son of Man rises from the dead' (Matt 17:9). The things seen and heard by John at the Jordan were not said to the disciples at that time. One can also see from Jesus' character, which everywhere avoids self-assertion, and because of this he says, 'Even if I do bear witness about myself, my testimony is not true' (John 5:31). He avoided boasting and preferred to demonstrate by his works rather than by words that he is the Christ, which is why the Jews said to him, 'If you are the Christ, tell us plainly' (John 10:24). But since the speaker addressing Jesus in Celsus' narrative is a Jew, it is necessary for Celsus to show that he has appropriately attributed this language to a Jewish persona. For the Jews do not connect John with Jesus, nor do they link John's punishment with Jesus'. Therefore in this very point Celsus is refuted: he who boasted that he knew everything did not even know what words to put into the mouth of a Jewish character speaking to Jesus.