24. Plato alone, of all the Greeks, (as) it seems to me, adhered more eminently to (the true) Philosophy ; and held correctly, respecting that good Being who is the First, and Cause of all; and became truly wise, respecting the Second ( Cause), who is the Creator of all. |90
25. He also established (it) justly and well, that the heavens, the sun, the moon, the stars, and wholly and at once, the whole world, were made by the God of all . |91
26. He also affirmed of the essence of the soul, that it is incorporeal and foreign to corruption. He was also cognizant of the intelligent Essences; and confessed, that the mind which is over all, (and) which we call THE WORD OF GOD , is King of all. To the same he gave the Rule over all, after the manner of a shipmaster, who well and duly provides for all: Him he also shewed was Governour . This man alone, of all the Greeks, confessed----just as we do,----of THE WORD OF GOD the Creator of the world. But, he is at hand, and we may hear (this) from himself, when discoursing of God thus :----
27. " Let us render honour, neither to that (heavenly body) which is of the year, nor to that of the month. Nor let us cut off to these indeed, any portion : neither the time in which it proceeds in its orbit, and completes the visible world, which THE WORD OF GOD has set in order. Of all who are in it, he who is happy will have wondered |92 (at Him), and afterwards acquired such love, as to investigate (Him) as far as mortal nature is able.
28. This man moreover, now calls THE DIVINE WORD , the Father, the Lord of all, and also Governour of all, in the very same words, and names Him just as we do ; expressing himself thus :----
29. "This Epistle, all you who consist of three should read, particularly in society: but, if not, between |93 two in common, as each may be able. As often as ye shall be able, avail yourselves of compact (together), and of the Law; and, by that Lord, who is justice (itself) swear ye, at once with care ;----not without wisdom,----and with erudition the sister of care; and, by that Governour of all, of the things that are, and of those that shall be; and, by the Father of the Governour and of the (efficient) Cause, the Lord, swear ye:----Him, whom, if we are truly Philosophers, we shall all clearly know, as our power (may be, being) of those who are happy men."
30. This (philosopher) also taught, that there was a just Judgment of God, and that He would render to every man as he should deserve: he very divinely shewed too, that the extreme good was this, that (men) be like to the Godhead ; be attached, and made (as it were) twin brothers, to virtue. Nevertheless, he also fell justly, (and as it was) likely, more than they all under reprehension. Why? Because he knew God as He was; but honoured Him not as God. He concealed the truth too, and put forth falsehood to the many. To those whom he loved, he spoke openly and well, as a Philosopher, of the Father and Creator of this whole. But, with the inhabitants of Athens, he conducted himself as no Philosopher; and went down to the Pirasus to Socrates, at his word, to pray to the Goddess, and, at once, to complete the festival of Bendis , together with all the inhabitants. And again, |94 he himself said of his master, that, when the end of his life drew near, he commanded them to sacrifice a cock! Nor did the best of Philosophers blush;----nor was it concealed :----that, the Father of his philosophy commanded them to propitiate the Deity, by means of fabricated earthly matter, and a little blood ;----the body of a dead bird ! And again, he called those (Deities) that were honoured in the cities, Demons: and this he did well. But, he further confessed, that these same were, and that they were formerly known as being, mortal men. And (here) he spoke the truth. Nevertheless, he advised that (men) should worship these same as Gods! And, because he submitted himself, with the multitudes, to the error of these, he may well have been memorialized as (implicated) in their pretences, because he concealed the word of truth under the show of Philosophy, and attached himself to |95 falsehood. Hear therefore, the things that he has said in the Timaeus:----
31. " To speak of the other Demons, and to know their power, is too great for us. We assent however, to those who have said before us, that they were the sons of the gods, even as they have affirmed : and they well knew their own fathers. It is impossible therefore, we should not approve of the sons of the gods, when behold, they advance neither probabilities nor strong proofs . But, as they affirmed, that they narrated respecting those who were their own (fathers) ; (so) we, adhering to the law, believe. Thus therefore, as these affirmed a generation respecting these gods, (so) let it be; and be affirmed, that the Ocean and |96 Tethys were the sons of the Earth and the Heavens; and of these same, Phorcys, Saturn, and Rhea (Ops): and of Saturn and Rhea, Jupiter and Juno: and those others, whom we know were all of them brothers of those mentioned: and others again, the children of these."
32. You (now) view the very Philosopher----who is from above , and of the exemplars that are above the world, and of the intelligent essences which are incorporeal,----beneath on the earth and on the ocean, immerged as it were in the depths of error ! He has moreover, introduced a generation of the gods,----him who could himself alone, say with a mind, the voice of which was more elevated than that of man,----
"What is that which always is, but that it might |97 exist, has no being? And it is this same which is apprehended by knowledge together with reason, and exists in all time according to itself. But, that which is to be considered by the sense that is irrational, and was, and is corruptible; that it might fully exist, it never had even being."
34. This selfsame Combatant therefore, now honours this identical (something,)----this which was, and is corruptible, but never fully existed, on account of its elemental and dissoluble character,----with the name of gods! And again the very same, (virtually) reprehending the expositors of this story of the gods, says of them, that it was neither from probabilities nor from strong proofs, that they spoke and put forth the error of these Deities. And, having accused them in this manner, he afterwards says, "We give our assent to them, and approve ;" when, behold! they had said nothing truly! Besides, when he called them the sons of the gods, |98 he clearly knew, that he was introducing their fathers who were, like all (other) men, subject to mortality! And again, he memorializes mortal gods, and mortal sons, who were like to their fathers, and who plainly said that they knew their own fathers. Nor does he conceal himself when he says, "It is impossible therefore, that we should not believe the sons of Gods;" still, he immediately accuses them, that they had advanced neither probabilities, nor strong proofs, and adds, "We approve of them, as saying that they narrated respecting their own" (fathers.) He says not----and (this) fully and carefully,----that they narrated; but, as "they said that they narrated;" and, we "assent to them as saying, that they were the sons of the gods." And, Whence had he learned this, that he should affirm just as they had said? For (says he) they said this: It was not I. That is; Still to them, when speaking of themselves, and unable to establish (the assertion) respecting themselves, either by probabilities or strong proofs, we nevertheless give our credence! He says too after this: " Thus therefore, as these affirmed the generation of the gods, (so) let it be;" necessarily, says he, just as these say! Not indeed as my opinion is, but as theirs (was,) let these things be affirmed !
35. You perceive therefore, that he advises it as proper, that we should adhere to error! And, For what cause does he set this up? Not because of any other thing, except the Law : that is, because of the death that was suspended on the Law! And this he openly acknowledges when he says, " We, adhering to the Law, believe." The fear then of man, and of the Law, dismissed from the Philosophers, that Fear, and Law, which (were) of the truth! Where then, are those excellent and wise things, |99 which the same elegant tongue,----(and) wholly for the sake of which,----said in astonishing language, and thus magnificently?----
36. " For there is neither law, nor any one ordinance superior to erudition; nor is it just, that the mind be subservient or subjected to any thing: it is, on the contrary, Prince of all, if indeed it be free in its nature." This same too, is he who said, that "Wheresoever a man places himself, thinking it to be best, there he ought, as I think, to remain, (even) in the storm; making no account of any thing, neither of death, nor of any other thing, before things hateful." He also said afterwards; "For this, that one should fear death, O men, would be nothing else, but that we should suppose him to be wise when he is not so."
37. How then can you, O Philosopher! be moved by death after these expressions? or, draw near to |100 honour" mortal Gods, on account of the Law? And, How can you dignify these, as sons of the Gods, in order that we might approve, and give (our) assent to them? In your own words you both reproach, and chastise (them), as having said nothing soundly, or by way of proof, respecting (these) their own Fathers. How then, having thus accused them, can you now advise men to approve of them? But, of these their Fathers, let us make inquiry :----
38. Of the Earth, you say, and the Heavens, the Ocean and Tethys were the progeny: and again, Phorcys, Saturn, and Rhea. And so after all these, Jupiter and Juno! Jupiter, after the Earth and Heavens! Jupiter, after Saturn! and Rhea, after the whole of these! What say you, O Combatant?----Where is the great Jupiter, who drove the flying chariot in the Heavens? Or, Is not that a sentiment of thine, over which every body cries out and wonders, when thou thus sayest:----
39. " The same great Jupiter therefore, drove and guided the flying chariot in the heavens, and to the same adhered the hosts (both) of the Gods and of the Demons ?"
40. But, I know not whence Jupiter is to be viewed, after these (viz.) the Earth, the Sea, the Ocean, Rhea, and |101 Saturn, mortals! or How, according to this sentiment of thine, we can give our assent to that of those who said before us, that " they are the sons of the Gods, just as they affirmed; as they clearly knew their own Fathers. It is impossible therefore, we should not approve of the sons of the Gods, when, behold! they advance neither probabilities nor strong proofs." And he adds; "Thus therefore just as they affirmed a generation, respecting these Gods (so) let it be, and be affirmed." After this he makes a long story, which is that of the generation of the Gods, (as) related by the Poets. And, upon this He assures us and says, that from Saturn and Rhea were Jupiter and Juno, and all those whom we know ; and the brothers of these, are they all said to be; and others again, who were the children of these.
41. Do you observe then, how this man goes on stating, ---- stating too not things that are not difficult, but impious, and those which are directly opposed to his own Philosophy? For this is he who in the Republics, drives |102 away contemptuously (and) entirely from his commonwealth, those whom he here calls the sons of the Gods! ----those ancients (I say) who spoke of the Divinity of these; Homer himself, Hesiod, and prior to these, Orpheus! But now, the same Philosopher advises, that we give credence to these; calling them the sons of the Gods! He supplicates too,----subsequently to the earth and the heavens, and to that humid substance which he names the Ocean, (implicated) in generation and corruption!----that Father of all, both of men and Gods; and Juno, with those others succeeding them, who----as he affirms----are said to be their brothers; and confesses, that they are the sons of those who are of the Earth, and of the Ocean: and he afterwards advises, that we should worship these as Gods ! Where then is that multitude of intellectual Essences? And, Where that incorporeal Form which is beyond the world? or, that Divine story about the nature that has neither colour nor form ? And, if indeed every soul be immortal, Why dost thou subject to mortal beings, those that are immortal? And, to the bodies of Demons, that which is Incorporeal? The intelligent and rational Essence too, to those that are of sense, and subject to corruption? It seems right to me therefore, to consider this man more reprehensible than (all) the rest; since an attachment, on account of the kindred character of his doctrines, drew me to him. For, as it appears to me, this man alone of all the Greeks, attached himself to the outward portals of the truth, and shewed, in many (of his) sentiments, a relationship with us. Nevertheless, such cannot be honoured by the truth; because he is, as it appears to me, more reprehensible by it than all |103 others. For he,----whose (main) desire was to live, while those things which attached themselves to his doctrine (virtually) effected his condemnation to death; and, while his opinion was that, (these) were no Gods;.----he did nevertheless submit himself (to them), as if he recognized no other life, but that only which was present.
42. The Peripatetics too, so attached,themselves to a belief, similar to that of the Originator of this Philosophy, that they supposed the soul which is in man to be mortal; and affirmed, that its form and body, was (what they termed) the Entelechia. For the sake of the present life,----which alone they acknowledged,----they submitted to the many. They believed too, that those were never Gods, which were (made) such by the law of the commonwealth: they submitted themselves (nevertheless to these) through the fear of death, and of the punishment of the Law.
43. The Stoics again, who taught that all was body, and that this sensible world alone was God, and that the (constituent) portions of this were Gods, persuaded themselves to do the things----although these might be odious,---- which were conformable to these their precepts! And, because they called the (constituent) portions of the world Gods, and worshipped the earthy substance, How could |104 they escape severe reprehension? These too, as they determined that the Elements were the origin of all things, worshipped the Elements accordingly.
44. He however (i. e. Plato) determined, as by divine revelation, what that is "which exists in all time, but which could not be (of itself) ;" and what that is "which is apprehended by knowledge together with reason, and (is) in all time according to itself." He also said, in what way it exists; stating openly, well, and wisely, (and) in plain terms, the true account of the Deity, as (its) nature is, in these words: "God therefore, according to our former discourse, holds the beginning, middle, and end, of this all which exists: and, proceeding according to nature, He rightly disposes (it). And to Him does justice ever adhere, awarding punishment to those who swerve from the Divine Law." But, How came he to swerve from the Divine Law, and to think defectively of the justice which is over all? and to put forth for us, these laws of mortal men? this Philosopher too,----this (I say), who could send the soul above the curvature of the heavens,----to fear Death? Besides, I cannot think that this same man held soundly of |105 the immortality of the soul, because he made the notion of the vulgar his own. For, it was not (according to this) that the souls of men only were immortal; but also, (those) of dogs, hedgehogs, ants, horses, asses, and of the rest of the irrational animals ; and, that (these) differed in nothing, as to their essence, from the souls of the Philosophers! He (also) affirmed after the Egyptian manner , that these same eiFected a change into every sort of body ; those of men being transfusable into the beastly nature. On these accounts, he is as worthy of reprobation in this case, as in that in which he gave his approval , but lied on the other side! And, although this was (such) an astonishing man, that he could apprehend the Maker and Creator of this whole; nevertheless, as he put not forth the word of righteousness, he is particularly deserving of the reprehension of every man : because " he knew God , but honoured Him not as God; but worshipped and served the creature, exclusive of the Creator." He also named those Gods, and worshipped them (as such), which were (supposed to be) fixed in visible bodies; the Sun, the Moon, and the Stars, confessing at once, and at the same time, that they were made, were perishable, and compounded in their nature of fire, earth, and at the same time, of the rest of the elements! And these same he worshipped, he honoured, and called them Gods! And then again, he afterwards |106 confessed that these very same (Deities) were both dissoluble, and subject to corruption! But we may hear him,----as the thing said is at hand,----saying in the Timaeus:----
45. "Gods of the Gods, of whom I am the Creator: every thing therefore, that has been bound together, is dissoluble; hence, because you came into being, in order to exist, you are not immortal: neither (are you) wholly indissoluble." And again (speaking) on their being, whence this is, and how to be determined, he says: "What fire is to air; such the air is to the water; and the water to the earth : out of which He bound up and established the visible and sensible heavens. And, by means of these things, and out of them, which are thus and |107 the number of which is four, the body of the world came into being." After this he says : "And, as to the existence of time, in order that time might be, the Sun, the Moon, and the five other Stars, which have the title of wandering (planetary), came into existence; (and this) for its determination, preservation, and calculation. So God made each one of these bodies, and placed them (each) in (its) course." And again, he says of the heavens, how they existed in all time; there being no beginning of the essence (of these) not even one: or being, of what sort this was in its primitive commencement. He then turns his discourse to his soul, and says, "it became existent, is visible, is subject, to sense, and has a body: and, that all such things are thus subject to sense, and, that those which are subject to sense, are apprehended by thought, and (so) perceived to be existences".
46. Was it not therefore, lapsing far from soundness of mind, that he, who spoke so orderly and well of these things, should call them Gods? that he should confess also, that they were made out of the perishable and corporeal matter of fire, water, air, and earth? and affirm that they were subject to dissolution, and in their nature corruptible? and, again, should name these selfsame beings Gods to be honoured ? For, What participation can that Name and Honour have, which is the Cause of |108 all things, with bodies that are subject to sense, and to dissolution? Or, What sort of companionship of the WORD , inseparable from Him who is in all time, but cannot be , (i. e. as we are, subject to corruption), with that which always was, but never had an existence (of its own), so that he should call these Deities God? For, if He is truly God, He who exists in all time, but has not that he might be (as we are) ; so far as He existed not thus, He was no God. But if he be God, who was at all times, but never existed (of himself): whatever he might otherwise be, he is no God. And, What sentiment can be more impious than this? For, the two things are opposed in their natures ;----this, which is apprehended by reason and knowledge; and that, which is to be considered by irrational sense:----this too, which is capable of action : and that, which is passive. How (I ask) can such opposites deserve one (and the same) name? For, this would be, as though a man should wonder at the science of the architect, but should attach the honour (due to him) to the work that was by him ; and (so) invert the order (of things)! And, should any one name the ship, the shipmaster; or the coachman, the chariot with its horses; so likewise, would he act most foolishly, who should dare to name the Creation of God, Gods; when behold! it had not escaped him,----but he had openly confessed,---- that they were bound up in the bands of God the Creator of all, and (affirmed, that they) were constituted out of the inanimate elements, fire, water, air, and earth! Nevertheless even this man thus (taught)!
47. But, What necessity can there now be, that I should bring to light, how the wise men collected themselves together in ranks, as it were, sectioned themselves off, separated, and mightily armed themselves against one another, just as in battle array, and met |109 with shields, spears, and hosts,----as one of the Poets says, "Behold the abundance of the uproar thickened----of the destroying and the perishing?"----for Plato termed their warfare with one another, the conflict of Giants when he thus spoke,----
48. "And behold! the conflict between them might be assimilated to that of Giants, because of the contention they had with one another about matter."