The stories of the heroes set beside the story of Jesus
But we, after showing from the prophetic writings what concerns our Jesus, and then comparing the history about him with the histories about them, [ … ] that no licentiousness is recorded of him. For not even those who plotted against him and sought “false testimony” against him (Matthew 26:59) found so much as a plausible ground for their “false testimony,” so as to accuse him of licentiousness. What is more, his death came about through a plot of men, and had nothing like the thunderbolt that struck Asclepius. And what is there that is solemn about the frenzied Dionysus, dressed in women’s clothing, that he should be worshipped as a god? And if those who defend these figures take refuge in allegories, we must examine separately whether the allegories are sound, and separately whether those who are torn apart by Titans and cast down from the heavenly throne can have real existence and be worthy of reverence and worship.
But our Jesus, who was seen by his own “devotees” (for I will use the word found in Celsus), was seen in truth; and Celsus slanders our message when he says that he was seen as a shadow. Let the histories about those figures be examined alongside the history of Jesus. Or does Celsus want those to be true, but these to be fictions, though they were written down by eyewitnesses, who showed by their deeds how clearly they had grasped what they had beheld, and who displayed their disposition by what they eagerly suffered for his message? And who, wishing to act in everything according to reason, would arbitrarily assent to the stories about those figures, while rushing at the accounts about this one without examination and disbelieving what is told of him?
Greek
Ἡμεῖς δὲ τὰ περὶ τοῦ ἡμετέρου Ἰησοῦ ἀπὸ τῶν προφητικῶν δεικνύντες καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο παραβάλλοντες τὴν περὶ αὐτοῦ ἱστορίαν ταῖς περὶ ἐκείνων ἱστορίαις . . . . . ὅτι οὐδεμία τούτου φέρεται ἀκολασία. οὐδὲ γὰρ αὐτοὶ οἱ ἐπιβουλεύοντες αὐτῷ καὶ ζητήσαντες κατ᾿ αὐτοῦ „ψευδομαρτυρίαν“ κἂν πιθανότητα εὗρον εἰς τὴν κατ᾿ αὐτοῦ „ψευδομαρτυρίαν,“ ἵν᾿ ἀκολασίας ἕνεκεν αὐτοῦ κατηγορήσωσιν· ἀλλὰ καὶ ὁ θάνατος αὐτοῦ ἐξ ἐπιβουλῆς ἀνθρώπων γέγονε καὶ οὐδὲν ὅμοιον ἔσχε τῷ πρὸς τὸν Ἀσκληπιὸν κεραυνῷ. τί δὲ σεμνὸν ἔχει ὁ μαινόλας Διόνυσος καὶ γυναικεῖα περιβεβλημένος. ἵν᾿ ὡς θεὸς προσκυνηθῇ; ἐὰν δὲ καὶ οἱ περὶ τούτων ἀπολογούμενοι ἐπὶ ἀλληγορίας καταφεύγωσιν, ἰδίᾳ μὲν ἐξεταστέον τὰς ἀλληγορίας, εἰ τὸ ὑγιὲς ἔχουσιν, ἰδίᾳ δὲ, εἰ δύνανται ὑπόστασιν ἔχειν καὶ ἄξιοι εἶναι σεβασμῶν καὶ προσκυνήσεως σπαραττόμενοι ὑπὸ Τιτάνων καὶ καταβαλλόμενοι ἀπὸ τοῦ οὐρανίου θρόνου. ὁ δ᾿ ἡμέτερος Ἰησοῦς ὁ ὀφθεὶς τοῖς ἰδίοις θιασώταις (χρήσομαι γὰρ τῷ παρὰ τῷ Κέλσῳ ὀνόματι) ὤφθη μὲν κατ᾿ ἀλήθειαν, συκοφαντεῖ δὲ τὸν λόγον ὁ Κέλσος λέγων αὐτὸν ὦφθαι σκιάν. καὶ συνεξεταζέσθω γε τὰ τῶν περὶ ἐκείνων ἱστοριῶν τῇ περὶ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ. ἢ ἐκεῖνα μὲν βούλεται ὁ Κέλσος εἶναι ἀληθῆ, ταῦτα δὲ ἀναγραφέντα ὑπὸ τῶν τεθεαμένων καὶ τῷ ἔργῳ δειξάντων τὴν ἐνάργειαν τῆς καταλήψεως περὶ τοῦ τεθεωρημένου καὶ παραστησάντων τὴν διάθεσιν ἐν οἷς προθύμως ὑπὲρ τοῦ λόγου αὐτοῦ πεπόνθασιν εἶναι πλάσματα; καὶ τίς ἂν κατὰ τὸ εὔλογον πάντα πράττειν θέλων ἀποκληρωτικῶς συγκαταθοῖτο μὲν (τοῖς) περὶ ἐκείνων εἰς δὲ τὰ περὶ τούτου ἀνεξετάστως ὁρμῶν ἀπιστήσαι τοῖς περὶ αὐτοῦ;