|
Translated from the Greek original by Frederick Crombie.
This Part: 128 Pages
Page 86
Chapter X.
He next continues: "You see how Plato, although maintaining that (the chief good) cannot be described in words, yet, to avoid the appearance of retreating to an irrefutable position, subjoins a reason in explanation of this difficulty, as even 'nothing' [4325] might perhaps be explained in words." But as Celsus adduces this to prove that we ought not to yield a simple assent, but to furnish a reason for our belief, we shall quote also the words of Paul, where he says, in censuring the hasty [4326] believer, "unless ye have believed inconsiderately." [4327] Now, through his practice of repeating himself, Celsus, so far as he can, forces us to be guilty of tautology, reiterating, after the boastful language which has been quoted, that "Plato is not guilty of boasting and falsehood, giving out that he has made some new discovery, or that he has come down from heaven to announce it, but acknowledges whence these statements are derived." Now, if one wished to reply to Celsus, one might say in answer to such assertions, that even Plato is guilty of boasting, when in the Timaeus [4328] he puts the following language in the month of Zeus: "Gods of gods, whose creator and father I am," and so on. And if any one will defend such language on account of the meaning which is conveyed under the name of Zeus, thus speaking in the dialogue of Plato, why should not he who investigates the meaning of the words of the Son of God, or those of the Creator [4329] in the prophets, express a profounder meaning than any conveyed by the words of Zeus in the Timaeus?
[4325] to meden.
[4326] eike pisteuonti.
[4327] 1 Cor. xv. 2.
[4328] [p. 41. S.]
[4329] tou demiourgou.
Reference address : https://ellopos.net/elpenor/greek-texts/fathers/origen/contra-celsum-3.asp?pg=86