Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| Chapter XXXIX PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP
Chapter
XXXIX.
In the next place, speaking of those who employ
the arts of magic and sorcery, and who invoke the barbarous names of
demons, he remarks that such persons act like those who, in reference
to the same things,4475
4475 ἐπὶ
τοῖς αὐτοῖς
ὑποκειμένοις. | perform marvels
before those who are ignorant that the names of demons among the Greeks
are different from what they are among the Scythians. He then
quotes a passage from Herodotus, stating that “Apollo is called
Gongosyrus by the Scythians; Poseidon, Thagimasada; Aphrodite,
Argimpasan; Hestia, Tabiti.”4476
4476 Cf. Herodot., iv.
59. | Now, he
who has the capacity can inquire whether in these matters Celsus and
Herodotus are not both wrong; for the Scythians do not understand the
same thing as the Greeks, in what relates to those beings which are
deemed to be gods. For how is it credible4477
that Apollo should be called Gongosyrus by the Scythians? I do
not suppose that Gongosyrus, when transferred into the Greek language,
yields the same etymology as Apollo; or that Apollo, in the dialect of
the Scythians, has the signification of Gongosyrus. Nor has any
such assertion hitherto been made regarding the other names,4478
4478 For the textual
reading, οὔπω
δὲ οὐδὲ περὶ
τῶν λοιπῶν
ταὐτόν τι
ἐρεῖ, Boherellus conjectures εἴρηται,
which has been adopted in the translation. | for the Greeks took occasion from different
circumstances and etymologies to give to those who are by them deemed
gods the names which they bear; and the Scythians, again, from another
set of circumstances; and the same also was the case with the Persians,
or Indians, or Ethiopians, or Libyans, or with those who delight to
bestow names (from fancy), and who do not abide by the just and pure
idea of the Creator of all things. Enough, however, has been said
by us in the preceding pages, where we wished to demonstrate that
Sabaoth and Zeus were not the same deity, and where also we made some
remarks, derived from the holy Scriptures, regarding the different
dialects. We willingly, then, pass by these points, on which
Celsus would make us repeat ourselves. In the next place, again,
mixing up together matters which belong to magic and sorcery, and
referring them perhaps to no one,—because of the
non-existence of any
who practise magic under pretence of a worship of this
character,—and yet, perhaps, having in view some who do
employ such practices in the presence of the simple (that they may have
the appearance of acting by divine power), he adds: “What
need to number up all those who have taught methods of purification, or
expiatory hymns, or spells for averting evil, or (the making of)
images, or resemblances of demons, or the various sorts of antidotes
against poison (to be found)4479
4479 For αἰσθητῶν,
Lommatzsch adopts the conjecture of Boherellus, approved by Ruæus,
ἐσθητων. | in clothes, or in
numbers, or stones, or plants, or roots, or generally in all kinds of
things?” In respect to these matters, reason does not
require us to offer any defence, since we are not liable in the
slightest degree to suspicions of such a nature.E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|