Celsus calls the creation story silly
Let us look also at what comes next, where he makes his pronouncement in a single phrase and, without saying anything even plausible, finds fault with Moses’ account of the making of the world, saying: “Moreover, the account of the world’s origin is also very silly.” Now if he had put forward the way in which it seemed to him silly, and some plausible arguments, we would have contended against them. But it does not seem reasonable to me to establish, in answer to his assertion, in what way it is not silly.
If anyone wishes to consider what moved us, and what we established, with what appeared to us a proof, about Moses’ account of the making of the world, let him take up what we have worked out on Genesis, from the beginning of the book as far as “This is the book of the generation of men” (Genesis 5:1). There we have tried, from the divine writings themselves, to establish what the heaven and earth are which came to be “in the beginning” (Genesis 1:1), and what is meant by the earth’s being invisible and unformed, and what the abyss is and the darkness upon it, and what the water is and the “Spirit of God” borne above it (Genesis 1:2), and what the “light” is which came to be (Genesis 1:3), and what “the firmament” is (Genesis 1:6) as distinct from the heaven made “in the beginning” (Genesis 1:1), and so on in order.
He has also pronounced the writing about the generation of human beings very silly, neither setting out the proofs nor contending against them. For he had, I think, no arguments able to overturn the statement that man was made “in the image of God” (Genesis 1:27). Nor did he understand the “paradise” planted by God (Genesis 2:8), and the life of man in it, which came first, and the life that came about through circumstance, when man was cast out because of sin and made to dwell opposite “the paradise of delight” (Genesis 3:24).
Let the man who says these things were told in a very silly way first attend to each of them, and to this one as well: “He stationed the cherubim and the flaming sword that turns, to guard the way of the tree of life” (Genesis 3:24). But suppose Moses wrote these things with no meaning in his mind, doing something like what the poets of the Old Comedy wrote in jest: “Proetus married Bellerophon, and Pegasus came from Arcadia.” Yet those poets put such things together because they wanted to raise a laugh; but it is not plausible that one who left writings to a whole nation, and wished to persuade those under his laws that these writings came from God, wrote what was irrelevant, and said without any meaning, “He stationed the cherubim and the flaming sword that turns, to guard the way of the tree of life” (Genesis 3:24), or any other of the things said about the generation of human beings and explored philosophically by the wise men among the Hebrews.
Greek
Ἴδωμεν δὲ καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς, ἐν οἷς μιᾷ λέξει ἀποφηνάμενος καὶ μηδὲ κατὰ τὸ πιθανόν τι λέγων κατηγορεῖ τῆς κατὰ Μωϋσέα κοσμοποιΐας εἰπών· ἔτι γε μὴν καὶ ἡ κοσμογένεια μάλα εὐηθική. εἰ μὲν οὖν τὸν φαινόμενον αὐτῷ τρόπον τοῦ εὐηθικὴν εἶναι αὐτὴν καί τινας πιθανότητας προηνέγκατο, κἂν ἠγωνισάμεθα πρὸς αὐτάς· οὐκ εὔλογον δέ μοι φαίνεται πρὸς τὴν ἀπόφασιν αὐτοῦ κατασκευάσαι, τίνα τρόπον οὐκ ἔστιν εὐηθική. εἰ δέ τις βούλεται τὰ κινήσαντα ἡμᾶς καὶ μετὰ τῆς φανείσης ἀποδείξεως κατασκευασθέντα περὶ τῆς κατὰ Μωϋσέα κοσμοποιΐας θεω ρῆσαι, λαβέτω τὰ πραγματευθέντα ἡμῖν εἰς τὴν Γένεσιν ἀπὸ τῆς ἀρχῆς τοῦ βιβλίου μέχρι τοῦ „αὕτη ἡ βίβλος γενέσεως ἀνθρώπων,“ ἐν οἷς πεπειράμεθα ἀπ᾿ αὐτῶν τῶν θείων γραμμάτων κατασκευάσαι, τίς ὁ „ἐν ἀρχῇ“ γενόμενος οὐρανὸς καὶ γῆ καὶ τὸ τῆς γῆς ἀόρατον καὶ ἀκατασκεύαστον, καὶ τίς ἡ ἄβυσσος καὶ τὸ ἐπ᾿ αὐτῆς σκότος, τί τε τὸ ὕδωρ καὶ τὸ ἐπιφερόμενον αὐτῷ „πνεῦμα τοῦ θεοῦ,“ καὶ τί τὸ γενητὸν „φῶς,“ τί τε „τὸ στερέωμα“ παρὰ τὸν „ἐν ἀρχῇ“ γενόμενον οὐρανὸν, καὶ οὕτω τὰ ἑξῆς. ἀπεφήνατο δὲ μάλα εὐηθικὴν εἶναι καὶ τὴν περὶ ἀνθρώπων γενέσεως γραφὴν, μήτε τιθεὶς τὰς δείξεις μήτ᾿ ἀγωνιζόμενος πρὸς αὐτάς· οὐ γὰρ εἶχεν οἶμαι λόγους ἀνατρέψαι δυναμένους τὸ „κατ᾿ εἰκόνα θεοῦ“ πεποιῆσθαι τὸν ἄνθρωπον. ἀλλ᾿ οὐδὲ συνίει τὸν ὑπὸ θεοῦ φυτευθέντα „παράδεισον“ καὶ τὴν προηγουμένην ἐν αὐτῷ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ζωὴν καὶ τὴν ἐκ περιστάσεως γενομένην, ἐκβληθέντος διὰ τὴν ἁμαρτίαν καὶ κατοικισθέντος ἐναντίον „τοῦ παραδείσου τῆς τρυφῆς.“ ὁ δὲ λέγων μάλα εὐηθικῶς ταῦτ᾿ εἰρῆσθαι πρῶτον ἐπιστησάτω καὶ ἑκάστῳ μὲν καὶ τῷδε· „ἔταξε τὰ χερουβὶμ καὶ τὴν φλογίνην ῥομφαίαν τὴν στρεφομένην, φυλάσσειν τὴν ὁδὸν τοῦ ξύλου τῆς ζωῆς.“ εἰ δ᾿ ἄρα μηδὲν νοήσας Μωϋσῆς ἀνέγραψε ταῦτα ἀλλὰ παραπλήσιόν τι ποιῶν οἷς παίζοντες οἱ τῆς ἀρχαίας κωμῳδίας ποιηταὶ ἀνεγράψαντο· Προῖτος ἔγημε Βελλεροφόντην, ὁ δὲ Πήγασος ἦν ἐξ Ἀρκαδίας· ἀλλ᾿ ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γελωτοποιεῖν θέλοντες τοιαῦτα συνέταττον, οὐ πιθανὸν δὲ τὸν ὅλῳ ἔθνει γραφὰς καταλιπόντα περὶ ὧν ἐβούλετο πεῖσαι τοὺς νομοθετουμένους ὅτι εἶεν ἐκ θεοῦ, ἀπρόσλογα γεγραφέναι καὶ χωρίς τινος νοῦ εἰρηκέναι τό· „ἔταξε τὰ χερουβὶμ καὶ τὴν φλογίνην ῥομφαίαν τὴν στρεφομένην, φυλάσσειν τὴν ὁδὸν τοῦ ξύλου τῆς ζωῆς“ ἢ ἄλλο τι τῶν περὶ τῆς ἀνθρώπων γενέσεως εἰρημένων καὶ ὑπὸ τῶν παρ᾿ Ἑβραίοις σοφῶν πεφιλοσοφημένων.