Arguments of Celsus, Porphyry, and the Emperor Julian, Against the Christians: Also Extracts from Diodorus Siculus, Josephus, and Tacitus, Relating to the Jews, Together with an Appendix — Plato — John Shaqi
Arguments of Celsus, Porphyry, and the Emperor Julian, Against the Christians: Also Extracts from Diodorus Siculus, Josephus, and Tacitus, Relating to the Jews, Together with an Appendix
Plato · en
The Manichees, as they gave themselves the most glorious names of
_Electi, Macarii, Catharistae_, mentioned by St. Austin**; so they
reproached the Catholics with the most contemptible name of _Simplices_,
'ideots,' which is the term that Manichaeus himself used in his
dispute*** with Archelaus, the Mesopotamian bishop, styling the
Christian teachers, _Simpliciorum magistri_, 'guides of the simple;'
because they could not relish his execrable doctrine concerning two
principles of good and evil.
The Apollinarians were no less injurious to the Catholics, in fixing on
them the odious name of _Anthropolatrae_, 'man-worshippers'; because they
maintained that Christ was a perfect man, and had a reasonable soul and
body, of the same nature with ours; which Apollinarius denied. Gregory
* Athan. Dial. 2. de Trinit. t. 2. p. 193.
** Aug. de Haer. c. 46.
*** Archel. Disp. adv. Manichaeum adcalcem Sozomen. Ed.
Vales, p. 197.
{114}
Nazianzen* takes notice of this abuse, and sharply replies to it;
telling the Apollinarians, that they themselves much better deserved the
name of _Sarcolatrae_, 'flesh-worshippers': for if Christ had no human
soul, they must be concluded to worship his flesh only.
The Origenians, who denied the truth of the resurrection, and asserted
that men should have only aerial and spiritual bodies in the next world,
made jests upon the Catholics, because they maintained the contrary,
that our bodies should be the same individual bodies, and of the same
nature that they are now, with flesh and bones, and all the members in
the same form and structure, only altered in quality, not in substance.
For this they gave them the opprobrious names of _Simplices_ and
_Philosarcae**, 'ideots' and 'lovers of the flesh'; _Carnei, Animales,
Jumenta_, 'carnal, sensual, animals'; _Lutei, 'earthy', Pilosiotae***,
which Erasmus's edition reads
* Naz. Ep. 1. ad Cledon.
** Hieron. Ep. 61. ad Pammach. t. 2. p. 171. Nos Simplices
et Philosarcas dicere, quod eadem ossa, et sanguis, et caro,
id est, vultus et membra, totiusque compago corporis
resurgat in novissima die.
*** Id. Ep. 65, ad Pam. et Ocean, de Error. Orig. p. 192.
Pelusiotas (leg. Pilosiotas) nos appellant, et Luteos,
Animalesque, et Cameos, quod non recipiamus ea quae Spiritus
sunt.
{115}
corruptly _Pelusiotae_, instead of _Pilonotae_; which seems to be a name
formed from _pili_, (hair); because the Catholics asserted, that the
body would rise perfect in all its parts, even with the hair itself to
beautify and adorn it.