He asserts, moreover, that “the body of a god is not nourished with such food (as was that of Jesus),” since he is able to prove from the Gospel narratives both that He partook of food, and food of a particular kind.  Well, be it so.  Let him assert that He ate the passover with His disciples, when He not only used the words, “With desire have I desired to eat this passover with you,” but also actually partook of the same.  And let him say also, that He experienced the sensation of thirst beside the well of Jacob, and drank of the water of the well.  In what respect do these facts militate against what we have said respecting the nature of His body?  Moreover, it appears indubitable that after His resurrection He ate a piece of fish; for, according to our view, He assumed a (true) body, as one born of a woman.  “But,” objects Celsus, “the body of a god does not make use of such a voice as that of Jesus, nor employ such a method of persuasion as he.”  These are, indeed, trifling and altogether contemptible objections.  For our reply to him will be, that he who is believed among the Greeks to be a god, viz., the Pythian and Didymean Apollo, makes use of such a voice for his Pythian priestess at Delphi, and for his prophetess at Miletus; and yet neither the Pythian nor Didymean is charged by the Greeks with not being a god, nor any other Grecian deity whose worship is established in one place.  And it was far better, surely, that a god should employ a voice which, on account of its being uttered with power, should produce an indescribable sort of persuasion in the minds of the hearers.

E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH