Celsus Used Against Marcion?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Celsus Used Against Marcion?

Post by Secret Alias »

In the next place, mixing up together various heresies, and not observing that some statements are the utterances of one heretical sect, and others of a different one, he brings forward the objections which we raised against Marcion. And, probably, having heard them from some paltry and ignorant individuals, he assails the very arguments which combat them, but not in a way that shows much intelligence. Quoting then things against Marcion, and not observing that it is against him that he is speaking, he asks:

Εἶτ' οἶμαι φύρων αἱρέσεις αἱρέσεσι καὶ μὴ ἐπισημειού μενος ὅτι τάδε μὲν ἄλλης αἱρέσεώς ἐστι τάδε δὲ ἄλλης, τὰ πρὸς Μαρκίωνα ὑφ' ἡμῶν ἀπορούμενα προφέρει, τάχα καὶ τούτων παρακούσας ἀπό τινων εὐτελῶς καὶ ἰδιωτικῶς ἐγκαλούντων λόγῳ, οὐ μὴν πάνυ συνετῶς. Ἐκτιθέμενος οὖν τὰ κατὰ Μαρκίωνος λεγόμενα καὶ μὴ ἐπισημειωσάμενος ὅτι πρὸς αὐτὸν λέγει φησί·
Celsus in the next place, citing (ἐκτιθέμενος) from history other than that of the divine record, those passages which bear upon the claims to great antiquity put forth by many nations, as the Athenians, and Egyptians, and Arcadians, and Phrygians, who assert that certain individuals have existed among them who sprang from the earth, and who each adduce proOfs of these assertions, says: [4.36]

Celsus, moreover, sneers at the "hatred" of Esau (to which, I suppose, he refers) against Jacob, although he was a man who, according to the Scriptures, is acknowledged to have been wicked; and not clearly citing (ἐκτιθέμενος) the story of Simeon and Levi, who sallied out (on the She-chemites) on account of the insult offered to their sister, who had been violated by the son of the Shechemite king, he inveighs against their conduct. [4.46]

Now Celsus here calumniates and falsities what is written in the book of Genesis to the following effect: "And the LORD God, seeing that the wickedness of men upon the earth was increasing, and that every one in his heart carefully meditated to do evil continually, was grieved He had made man upon the earth. And God meditated in His heart, and said, I will destroy man, whom I have made, from the face of the earth, both man and beast, and creeping thing, and fowl of the air, because I am grieved that I made them;" quoting (ἐκτιθέμενος) words which are not written in Scripture, as if they conveyed the meaning of what was actually written [6.53]

For, quoting (ἐκτιθέμενος) the sayings of the Stoics, and affecting not to know the doctrine about "things indifferent," he thinks that the divine nature was cast amid pollution, and was stained either by being in the body of a woman, until a body was formed around it, or by assuming a body. [6.73]
Last edited by Secret Alias on Fri Jun 15, 2018 9:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Celsus Used Against Marcion?

Post by Secret Alias »

Clearly Celsus has an orthodox book which counters the Marcionite 'error' but ends up ridiculing both source and subject.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
lsayre
Posts: 769
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Celsus Used Against Marcion?

Post by lsayre »

It's interesting that in about 175 AD Celsus (per Origin, writing 70-75 years later) stated this:
The Christian believers, like persons who in a fit of drunkenness lay violent hands upon themselves, have corrupted the Gospel from its original integrity, to a threefold, and fourfold, and many-fold degree, and have remodeled it, so that they might be able to answer objections.
It appears that by ~175 AD there were already a multitude of recognized redactions of the "original" gospel. All written to answer objections to the original. Might this point to Marcion's 'Gospel of the Lord' as being the original? Are all of the gospels which have come down to us corrections of objections raised with respect to Marcion's gospel?
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Celsus Used Against Marcion?

Post by Joseph D. L. »

That's one reason why I am sceptical of a date range of 175-180 ad for the composing of The True Word.

If Celsus is referring to a Marcionite text--presumably the one Irenaeus and Tertullian knew--than this pushes the date for The True Word back by at least twenty years, as this text didn't come about until the seventies of the second century, and there would need to be a period between its emergence and its being corrupted into a "three fold, and four fold, and many fold" state; and these corrupted versions being propagated throughout the empire. (Twenty years, I would say, is a good medium. It could be less, but it could be much more). So a date range from 195-205 ad seems more workable to me, but I would push it up to, at the latest, 215 ad.
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Celsus Used Against Marcion?

Post by Joseph D. L. »

Also, didn't Justin Martyr at one point in Dialogue With Trypho say that he too knew a book that dealt with heresiology?
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Celsus Used Against Marcion?

Post by John2 »

lsayre wrote: Sat Jun 16, 2018 2:52 am It's interesting that in about 175 AD Celsus (per Origin, writing 70-75 years later) stated this:
The Christian believers, like persons who in a fit of drunkenness lay violent hands upon themselves, have corrupted the Gospel from its original integrity, to a threefold, and fourfold, and many-fold degree, and have remodeled it, so that they might be able to answer objections.
It appears that by ~175 AD there were already a multitude of recognized redactions of the "original" gospel. All written to answer objections to the original. Might this point to Marcion's 'Gospel of the Lord' as being the original? Are all of the gospels which have come down to us corrections of objections raised with respect to Marcion's gospel?
I think it might point to Mark being the original gospel which was later "remodeled" by Matthew and Luke (and possibly John and others) to "answer objections." For example, in Goodacre's book The Synoptic Problem that is linked to in another recent thread, he writes on page 26:
Most believe that Matthew is using Mark here [in 19:27] and that he is troubled by the implication of the question 'Why do you call me good?' Matthew therefore rephrases (very slightly) in such a way as to change the question and avoid the difficult implication that Jesus might be admitting to not being wholly 'good.' Here, perhaps, we witness an interesting moment in the development of Christian doctrine, for in the change from the unembarrassed brashness of Mark to the more measured, reverential Matthew, we see perceptions of Jesus' identity subtly changing.
And on page 101 he notes:
The words in italics here, 'when Abiathar was high priest' (Mk. 2.26) are an error. The incident related (1 Sam. 21.1-6)involves not Abiathar but his father Ahimelech. On the assumption of Markan Priority, Matthew and Luke realized this and omitted the words 'when Abiathar was high priest.'
That would be my first guess, anyway.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Celsus Used Against Marcion?

Post by John2 »

Clearly Celsus has an orthodox book which counters the Marcionite 'error' but ends up ridiculing both source and subject.
I've never thought about this before, nor do I care if Celsus used Against Marcion or not, but as I look at the passage in question (6.53) I'm inclined to think not. I think the answer is in the underlined part:
In the next place, mixing up together various heresies, and not observing that some statements are the utterances of one heretical sect, and others of a different one, he brings forward the objections which we raised against Marcion. And, probably, having heard them from some paltry and ignorant individuals ...
Origen's guess (i.e., "probably") is that Celsus "heard" the objections that orthodox Christians made against Marcion "from some paltry and ignorant individuals" and not from a book.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Celsus Used Against Marcion?

Post by Secret Alias »

You can be too trusting of sources Bob. Hence your James Book. What do you think Origen (or Eusebius) is going to do, admit Celsus is well researched? Even when he produces that "accursed diagram" he doesn't cut him slack. Origen's mission is to undercut Celsus. Neither are "scholars" in the modern sense.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Celsus Used Against Marcion?

Post by Secret Alias »

Osborn provides a good starting point for assuming the Celsus read Justin, the author of the original Against Marcion:
Had Celsus read Justin? Apart from some appreciation of history, there are other affinities between Justin and Celsus. Celsus has a philosophy which lies adjacent to Justin's theology and which operates with the two main concepts of logos and nomos90. The similarity between the two schemes is evident in the polemic which both writers employ. Justin uses his account of the logos to show that the philosophers and legislators of Greece were dependent on the revelation which is given through scripture and incarnation. Celsus' writings reverse the basic direction to show that Christianity is dependent on the wisdom of the philosophers, from -which it is an inferior derivative. The common starting point for both Justin and Celsus is the account of the inexpressible god which Plato gives in the Timaeus*1. While this utterance of Plato was sadly overworked in the second century there is sufficient similarity between the ways in which Celsus and Justin use it to suggest the acquaintance of Celsus with what Justin had said. Particular arguments also suggest that Celsus knew Justin. Justin's account of the testimony of the prophets and its confirmation in history is parallel to Celsus' account of the writings of wise men which continue to be valid92. Justin argues that Moses and the prophets precede the Greeks who are dependent on them. Celsus argues that Moses received his account of the creation from the wise men who were before him.93 Celsus claims that Christian penitence rests upon a misunderstanding of a statement in Plato. Justin had claimed that the pagans had borrowed from Moses the necessity for cleansing before entering the presence of God94. Justin argues that Moses and the prophets precede the Greeks who are dependent on them. Celsus argues that Moses received his account of the creation from the wise men who were before him. Celsus claims that Christian penitence rests upon a misunderstanding of a statement in Plato. Justin had claimed that the pagans had borrowed from Moses the necessity for cleansing before entering the presence of God. Justin claimed to find in the second letter of (pseudo) Plato, an account of the Trinity. Celsus believes that Celsus believes that the same passage shows where the Christians get their idea of the kingdom of God. Justin shows that Christians must be on the side of law and order. Celsus echoes the words of Justin in his accusation of disloyalty. Celsus accuses Christians of specific disloyalty to the emperor, whose end was anticipated. Justin uses words which could be misunderstood in this way. Celsus answers Justin's criticism of the demi-gods of Greek mythology in a way which suggests acquaintance with what Justin said. Both Justin and Celsus consider the possible similarity of the sacraments and pagan mysteries. Celsus claims that there are similarities which Justin denies. Justin's account of the resurrection, in which he uses the metaphor of seed, is also criticised by Celsus. Finally, as noticed in an earlier chapter, Celsus' theme of true logos is also the theme of Justin. Further evidence may be adduced to strengthen the case for Celsus' concern over Justin100. Celsus and Justin both connect the resurrection appearances with stories of the deified emperor's ascent101 and discuss the significance of rapid changes of character for belief in the freedom of the will102. They disagree on the questions of eternal punishment103 and an anthropocentric universe104. Justin refers on four occasions to the divine nature of Christ's blood and Celsus takes up this point105. The exactness of these parallels suggests Celsus' direct acquaintance with the actual writings of Justin. https://books.google.com/books?id=Wu6Nr ... 22&f=false
It is worth noting that when Celsus in Book Six of Origen's response to the True Word does not name the Marcionites by name in this section and Origen accuses him on not knowing that he is responding to that sect, even mixing things held by these heretics and the true Church indiscriminately. I have independently noted that the oldest strata of Against Marcion - preserved as I have argued in Tertullian's Latin translation of Irenaeus's original Greek modification of Justin's lost original (AM 1.1 specifies three versions of the treatise in circulation) did not make explicit reference to Marcion or the Marcionites.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Celsus Used Against Marcion?

Post by Secret Alias »

The same conclusions were reached by Andresen independent of Osborn: https://books.google.com/books?id=-Q9EA ... by&f=false (I will transcribe the relevant section p. 39 - 43 or an English summary when I get back from playing tennis in 100 degree weather!)
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Post Reply