Celsus, Origen, and Julian on Christian Miracle‐Claims
2014; Wiley; Volume: 57; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1111/heyj.12161
ISSN1468-2265
Autores Tópico(s)Augustinian Studies and Theology
ResumoThe Heythrop JournalVolume 57, Issue 1 p. 99-108 ARTICLE Celsus, Origen, and Julian on Christian Miracle-Claims David Neal Greenwood, David Neal Greenwood University of EdinburghSearch for more papers by this author David Neal Greenwood, David Neal Greenwood University of EdinburghSearch for more papers by this author First published: 09 May 2014 https://doi.org/10.1111/heyj.12161Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Notes 1My thanks to the anonymous reviewer at Heythrop Journal, as well as my colleagues Alex Imrie and Cas Valachova for their valuable suggestions. 2For the edition of the Contra Celsum, I have used Miroslav Marcovich, ed., Origenes Contra Celsum: libri VIII (Leiden: Brill, 2001), with a close eye to the edition of Marcel Borret, ed., Origène: Contre Celse, tom. 1, Paris: Editions du Cerf, 1967), and the translation of Henry Chadwick, Origen: Contra Celsum (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980), which I have lightly modified at points. For the edition of Julian's Contra Galilaeos, I have used Emanuela Masaracchia, ed., Giuliano Imperatore, Contra Galilaeos, Rome: Edizioni dell'Ateneo, 1990), and the translation is that of Wilmer Wright, ed., The Works of the Emperor Julian, vol. 3 (London and Cambridge, Mass.: Heinemann, 1923). 3 David Neal Greenwood, ‘Crafting divine personae in Julian's Oration 7,’ Classical Philology 109.2 (2014), 140–149. 4Origen's approach to this issue still forms a central part of the arguments utilized in modern scholarship, e.g. N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God (London: S.P.C.K., 2003). 5Matt 11:4-5 NRSV. 6John 5:2-9; 9.1-7. 7Isa 35:5-6 NRSV. 8John 10.37-38 NRSV. 9 Werner Kahl, New Testament Miracle Stories in their Religious-Historical Setting: A Religionsgeschichtliche Comparison from a Structural Perspective (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1994), 76. These categories have also been utilised to clarify discussion in Eric Eve, The Jewish Context of Jesus’ Miracles (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002), 15; and for a general audience, cf. Robert Bowman and J. Ed Komoszewski, Putting Jesus in His Place: The Case for the Deity of Christ (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2007). 10 R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism (London: Duckworth, 1972), 104. 11 Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho 7.3, 35.8. 12Τὰ γὰρ μετὰ τὸ βάπτισμα ὑπὸ Χριστοῦ πραχθέντα, καὶ μάλιστα τὰ σημεῖα, τὴν αὐτοῦ κεκρυμμένην ἐν σαρκὶ θεότητα ἐδήλουν, Melito, fr. 6.1.6-8, tr. Hall. Stuart Hall, ed. and tr., Melito of Sardis, On Pascha and fragments (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979), 68–71: Although it is representative of Christian thought during this period either way, Melito fr. 6 is treated as genuine by Otto, Harnack, Bonner, Blank, Cantalamessa, and Grant, and as a later forgery by Nautin, Richard, and Hall. 13διὰ τῶν ἔργων ἐνέφαινε, καὶ ἐγνώριζεν ἑαυτὸν εἶναι τὸν Λόγον τοῦ Πατρός, τὸν τοῦ παντὸς ἡγεμόνα καὶ βασιλέα. Ath., De inc. 16.23-25, tr. Thomson. 14 Carl Andresen, Logos und Nomos: Die Polemik des Kelsos wider das Christentum (Berlin: De Gruyter, 1955), 308; cf. Chadwick, v; Robert Wilken, The Christians as the Romans Saw Them (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1984), 101. 15 John Dillon, The Middle Platonists: A Study of Platonism 80 B.C. to A.D. 220 (London: Duckworth, 1977), 401. 16 Henri Crouzel, Origen, tr. Worrall (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1998), 48; Jean Daniélou, Origen, tr. Mitchell (London: Sheed & Ward, 1955) dates it at A.D. 180; R. Joseph Hoffmann, tr., Celsus: On the True Doctrine (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987), 29. While this was a local persecution, Eusebius seems to treat other persecutions contemporaneously (Hist. Eccl. 5.1.3). See discussion in Chadwick, xxvi–xxviii. 17 Stephen Goranson, ‘ Celsus of Pergamum: Locating a Critic of Early Christianity,’ in D. R. Edwards and C. T. McCullough, eds, The Archaeology of Difference: Gender, Ethnicity, Class and the “Other” in Antiquity: Studies in Honor of Eric M. Myers (Boston: American Schools of Oriental Research, 2007), 366–368. 18 Robert Wilken, The Christians as the Romans Saw Them (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1984), 95, 101. 19 Jean Daniélou, Origen, tr. Walter Mitchell (London & New York: Sheed and Ward, 1955), 100–101; cf. Morton Smith, Jesus the Magician (London: Gollancz, 1978), 58. 20αἴσχιστος, C. Cels. 4.2.11. 21μίασμα τοσοῦτος, C. Cels. 6.73.20-21. Here following the thinking of Plato, who taught that the Good or the One was beyond being. Rep. 6.509b = C. Cels. 6.64.22; cf. 4.14.9-12; 6.64.13, 22; 6.73.17-21; cf. Chadwick, 379. 22C. Cels. 1.32.20. 23C. Cels. 4.3, 8.28. 24 Eugene V. Gallagher, Divine Man or Magician?: Celsus and Origen on Jesus. SBL Dissertation Series 64 (Chico: Scholars Press, 1982), 43. 25διὰ τοῦτ’ ἐνομίσαμεν αὐτὸν εἶναι υἱὸν θεοῦ, ἐπεὶ χωλοὺς καὶ τυφλοὺς ἐθεράπευσε, C. Cels. 2.48.13-14. 26ταῦτα θεομισοῦς ἦν τινος καὶ μοχθηροῦ γόητος, C. Cels. 1.71.19-20. 27 H. Liddell, R. Scott, H. Jones, and R. McKenzie, A Greek-English Lexicon, 9th edition, with a Revised Supplement (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), 356, s.v.: γόης; W. Bauer, W. Arndt, F. W. Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001), 204, s.v. γόης; Hort Balz and Gerhard Schneider, Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993), 257, s.v. γόης; W. Burkert ‘ΓΟΗΣ. Zum griechischen “Schamanismus”,’ Rheinisches Museum für Philologie 105 (1962), 36–55. 28 Liddell, Scott, Jones, McKenzie, 356, s.v.: γοητεία. 29 τὰ μεγάλα ψευσάμενον τὸν Ἰησοῦν, C. Cels. 2.7.13-4. 30 Wilken, 109; cf. 98, 100–1; cf. Mark Edwards, ‘ Christianity, A.D. 70–192,’ in Alan K. Bowman, Peter Garnsey, and Averil Cameron (eds), The Cambridge Ancient History vol. XII: The Crisis of Empire, A.D. 193–337, Cambridge, 585. 31γοητείᾳ δυνηθέντος ἃ ἔδοξε παράδοξα πεποιηκέναι, C. Cels. 1.6.21-22. 32οὗτος διὰ πενίαν εἰς Αἴγυπτον μισθαρνήσας κἀκεῖ δυνάμεών τινων πειραθείς, ἐφ’ αἷς Αἰγύ πτιοι σεμνύνονται, ἐπανῆλθεν ἐν ταῖς δυνάμεσι μέγα φρονῶν, καὶ δι’ αὐτὰς θεὸν αὑτὸν ἀνηγόρευσε, C. Cels. 1.38.8-11; cf. 1.28. 33τὰ ἔργα τῶν γοήτων, ὡς ὑπισχνουμένων θαυμασιώτερα … ἀνακαλούντων δεῖπνά τε πολυτελῆ καὶ τραπέζας καὶ πέμματα καὶ ὄψα τὰ οὐκ ὄντα δεικνύντων καὶ ὡς ζῷα κινούντων οὐκ ἀληθῶς ὄντα ζῷα ἀλλὰ μέχρι φαντασίας φαινόμενα τοιαῦτα, C. Cels. 1.68.3-9. 34τίς τοῦτο εἶδε; Γυνὴ πάροιστρος, ὥς φατε, καὶ εἴ τις ἄλλος τῶν ἐκ τῆς αὐτῆς γοητείας, τοι κατά τινα διάθεσιν ὀνειρώξας καὶ κατὰ τὴν αὐτοῦ βούλησιν δόξῃ πεπλανημένῃ φαντασιωθείς, C. Cels. 2.55.22-25. 35Mosetto has suggested that on the specific topic of Christ's miracles, Celsus and Origen somewhat talk past one another with their different presuppositions. Francesco Mosetto, I miracoli evangelici nel dibattito tra Celso e Origene (Rome: Libreria Ateneo salesiano, 1986). 36Eus., Hist. eccl. 6.1. 37 Timothy D. Barnes, Constantine and Eusebius, (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1981), 86; cf. Crouzel, 48; Ronald Heine, Origen: Scholarship in the Service of the Church (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), 220; Chadwick, xiv–xv. Elizabeth DePalma Digeser, A Threat to Public Piety: Christian, Platonists and the Great Persecution (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2012), 68–69, places this into context with the tensions with government and rival philosophical schools and suggests that the beginnings of the Decian persecution may have motivated Origen to write C. Cels. 38σημεῖα καὶ τεράστια ἐσόμενα ὑπὸ τοῦ προφητευομένου τοιάδε, Origen, C. Cels. 3.2.6-7; cf. Origen, Comm. John 2.34. 39Πολλάκις δ’ ὁ Κέλσος ἤδη μὴ δυνάμενος ἀντιβλέπειν αἷς ἀναγέγραπται πεποιηκέναι δυνάμεσιν ὁ Ἰησοῦς διαβάλλει αὐτὰς ὡς γοητείας· καὶ πολλάκις τῷ λόγῳ κατὰ τὸ δυνατὸν ἡμῖν ἀντείπομεν, C. Cels. 2.48. 40ὡς ἀπὸ μαγείας καὶ οὐ θείᾳ δυνάμει γεγενημένας, C. Cels. 1.38.7-8. 41τίνα ἔχει πιθανότητα τὸ μάγους τοσούτοις κινδύνοις ἑαυτοὺς παραβεβληκέναι διδασκαλίαν μαγείας ἀπαγορεύουσαν;, C. Cels. 1.38.20-3. 42 Aryeh Kofsky, Eusebius of Caesarea Against Paganism (Leiden: Brill, 2000), 174: ‘Readiness to die for Christianity in every generation was decisive proof of the truth of the Christian faith.’ 43Ἰησοῦ δὲ σταυρωθέντος ἐπὶ πάντων Ἰουδαίων καὶ καθαιρεθέντος αὐτοῦ τοῦ σώματος ἐν ὄψει τοῦ δήμου αὐτῶν, C. Cels. 2.56.6-7. 44Σαφὲς δ’ οἶμαι καὶ ἐναργὲς εἶναι τὸ ἐκ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ ἐπιχείρημα, ἐπικινδύνῳ ὡς πρὸς τὸν τῶν ἀνθρώπων βίον διδασκαλίᾳ ἑαυτοὺς ἐπιδεδωκότων, ἣν οὐκ ἂν πλασσόμενοι τὸ ἐγηγέρθαι τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐκ νεκρῶν οὕτως εὐτόνως ἐδίδαξαν, C. Cels. 2.56.20-24. 45 Mosetto 1986, 108, writes: ‘al corrente della metodologia ormai collaudata nella storiografia ellenistica, per la prima volta nella storia del pensiero cristiano egli ne ha fatto uso sistematico per difendere la storicità dei miracoli evangelici.’ 46 Gallagher, 63–64. 47Although Kofsky, 174–175, notes that Origen was shifting the emphasis somewhat towards ongoing miracles within the Christian community, as only three of the seven miracles he utilized in his argument were claimed for Christ himself 48 Barnes, 184. 49Eus., Reply to Hierocles 1.1 Jones. 50magicis artibus operati sunt quaedam signa, Porphyry, Contra Christianos, frag. 4 Harnack, preserved in Hieron., Tract. de psalmo 81. 51Eus., Dem. evang. 3.2.91d. 52τοτὲ δὲ προστάγματι λόγου τοὺς ἐν ἀνθρώποις δαίμονας ἐλαύνων, καὶ ἄλλοτε πάλιν νοσηλευομένοις καὶ παντοίοις ἀσθενειῶν εἴδεσι καταπονουμένοις τὴν ἴασιν ἀφθόνως δωρούμενος, Eus., Dem. evan. 3.4.107d; 3.4.108cd. 53θεότητος τὰ τεκμήρια, Eus., Dem. evang. 3.4.109a. 54 W. J. Ferrar, The Proof of the Gospel Being the Demonstratio Evangelica of Eusebius of Caesarea, vol. 1 (London: S.P.C.K., 1920), xiv. 55Eus., Dem. evang. 3.6.131ab; 3.6.128b, citing Acts 19:19. 56Eus., Dem. evang. 3.5.111d. 57The deaths of Julian's father and siblings (but for Gallus) were almost certainly the responsibility of Constantius II: see Richard Burgess ‘The Summer of Blood: The “Great Massacre” of 337 and the Promotion of the Sons of Constantine,’ Dumbarton Oaks Papers 62 (2008), 5–51; contra Klaus Rosen, Julian. Kaiser, Gott und Christenhasser (Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 2006), who credits military leaders with independent action. Julian, 5.270d; Lib., Or. 18.10; cf. Socr., 3.1; Sozom., 5.2.9; Amm. Marc. 25.3.23. 58Julian, Or. 7.232c-234c; Ep. 111; Lib. Or. 18.19. 59 Wilken, 191. 60Lib., Or. 18.178. 61 Wilken, 178. 62Ep. 90; cf. C. Gal. 262d. Julian's Ep. 90 to Photinus is extant only in a Latin copy, the original Greek was likely ἄλογος. 63 Wilmer C. Wright, The Works of the Emperor Julian, vol. 3 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1923), 314, holds that ‘Julian's arguments against the Christian doctrine do not greatly differ from those used in the second century by Celsus, and by Porphyry in the third.’ Similarly, Rowland Smith, Julian's Gods: Religion and Philosophy in the Thought and Action of Julian the Apostate, (London: Routledge, 1995), 191, criticizes Julian's ‘readiness to repeat standard criticisms.’ 64 Jean Bouffartigue, L'Empereur Julien et la culture de son temps (Paris: Institute d'Études augustiniennes, 1992), 685–686. 65C. Gal. 222a, Praep. evan. 11.5.5. 66 Bouffartigue, 385–386. 67 E. David Hunt, ‘ The Christian Context of Julian's Against the Galileans’ in Nicholas Baker-Brian and Shaun Tougher (eds), Emperor and Author: The Writings of Julian the Apostate (Cardiff: The Classical Press of Wales, 2012), 253. 68 Greenwood, ‘Crafting divine personae in Julian's Oration 7’. 69C. Gal. 191de. 70Julian, Or. 7.219c-220a. 71ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸν πάντας πανταχοῦ τοὺς πώποτε γόητας καὶ ἀπατεῶνας ὑπερβαλλόμενον Παῦλον, C. Gal. 100a. 72καὶ ὁ παρ’ ὑμῖν κηρυττόμενος Ἰησοῦς εἷς ἦν τῶν Καίσαρος ὑπηκόων. εἰ δὲ ἀπιστεῖτε, μικρὸν ὕστερον ἀποδείξω· μᾶλλον δὲ ἤδη λεγέσθω. φατὲ μέντοι μετὰ τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτὸν ἀπογράψασθαι καὶ τῆς μητρὸς ἐπὶ Κυρηνίου, C. Gal. 213a, tr. Wright. 73ὧν εἷς ἐὰν φανῇ τῶν τηνικαῦτα γνωριζομένων ἐπιμνησθεὶς, ἐπὶ Τιβερίου γὰρ ἤτοι Κλαυδίου ταῦτα ἐγίνετο, περὶ πάντων ὅτι ψεύδομαι νομίζετε, C. Gal. 206b, tr. Wright. 74ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς ἀναπείσας τὸ χείριστον τῶν παρ’ ὑμῖν, ὀλίγους πρὸς τοῖς τριακοςίοις ἐνιαυτοῖς ὀνομάζεται, ἐργασάμενος παρ’ ὃν ἔζη χρόνον οὐδὲν ἀκοῆς ἄξιον, C. Gal. 191de, tr. Wright. 75εἰ μή τις οἴεται τοὺς κυλλοὺς καὶ τυφλοὺς ἰάσασθαι καὶ δαιμονῶντας ἐφορκίζειν ἐν Βηθσαιδᾷ καὶ ἐν Βηθανίᾳ ταῖς κώμαις τῶν μεγίστων ἔργων εἶναι, C. Gal. 191e, tr. Wright. 76John 5:1-9. 77John 9:1-8. 78Mark 8:22-26 records the healing in Bethsaida, although the reference to a demon possession in Bethany is either a conflation of the raising of Lazarus, or more likely simply an error on Julian's part as he wrote from memory. 79 Wilken, 177. In his Contra Julianum, Cyril held it irrefutable – until his effort, of course: PG 76.508c; cf. Polymnia Athanassiadi-Fowden, Julian and Hellenism: An Intellectual Biography (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1981), 161, reprinted as Polymnia Athanassiadi, Julian and Hellenism (London: Routledge, 1992); Smith, 191. 80In the several decades after Julian's death, he was pilloried by Christian writers. Shortly after Julian's death, his former fellow student Gregory Nazianzen (Or. 4.96) attacked Julian's plan to deprive Christians of all rights of speech and assembly, while in 377–8, Chrysostom (Babylas 119) wrote that during Julian's time in Antioch, he ‘prepared for war against the churches.’ Volume57, Issue1January 2016Pages 99-108 ReferencesRelatedInformation
Referência(s)