leefeng

塞爾蘇斯（Celsus）是有紀錄以來第一位發出反基督繳文的戰士，他的《潘台拉：耶穌的生父？》
分析了耶穌的老爸是潘台拉Pantera。

潘台拉（Pantera）故事的最早版本，出自名叫塞爾蘇斯（Celsus）的哲學家。他在一篇公元178年前後撰寫的反基督教作品《論真信條》之中說了一個故事，指馬利亞”從一個名叫潘台拉的羅馬軍人懷了孕”，被丈夫當作淫婦趕了出去。

由於在隨後的幾百年間，基督教狂熱分子只要見到塞爾蘇斯的書就燒，所以，後人只能從俄利根的書中摘錄出塞爾蘇斯的原話整理成書。

公元178年前已經看得咁透徹？睇穿曬耶穌教的呃神騙鬼技倆！

「轉載」
轉自反基帝國



1- 基督教是一種適合於沒受過教育的人的學說，只能贏得頭腦簡單的人，因為這些人自己太蠢，缺乏作學術的習性，基督教的追隨者是頭腦簡單、低等並愚鈍的人，是奴僕、女人和孩子。遇到有教養、不受這種欺騙的人，基督徒只能逃之夭夭。


2-基督教從內容上看沒什麼新東西，只是重複了受過教育的人早就熟知的許多觀點，比如對敵人的愛、謙卑、輕視物質財富、上帝之子、拒絕圖像崇拜和處女生子等等。希臘人不用吹噓什麼神的語言或神子的語言，對這種東西的表達卻要好得多。


3-對猶太教的選民思想提出批判。猶太人是一個次要民族，是完全沒受過教育的人。猶太人的思想是︰上帝是對我們進行了啟示，然後就離棄了世界和天體，也不再管廣闊的大地，而只是統治我們，只給我們送使者，不停地送啊，探究啊，使我們永遠和他聯繫在一起。


4-基督徒根據自己的以人為中心的觀念錯誤地把最高的神人性化了。基督徒們給上帝強加了過於大、過於世俗的野心。上帝對世間的事根本不關心，把最高的上帝想像為一個藏身在受苦的人的形態裡，根本就是愚蠢。


5-基督徒說最高的上帝化成了拿撒勒的耶穌這個人，僅憑耶穌這個人和他的生活作風，就是胡說。理由之一是，耶穌是瑪利亞和一個叫作Panthera的羅馬士兵的私生子。


6-耶穌是第一個人亞當的後代，不能令人信服。猶太教─基督教的歷史哲學觀整個就是給小孩子們聽的童話，而舊約不同的預言預示了他的出現的說法，都是他的門徒們杜撰的。


7-而所謂變成肉身的說法，究竟上帝降臨人間有什麼意義呢？為了了解人間的情況？那他不是全知的嗎？他知道一切，卻不改善什麼，是因為他沒有能力還是因為他的神權沒這個能力，除了為此向人間派一個人來的能力？所以，基督徒並非在信全能的神，上帝怎麼能沒有能力說服並糾正人呢？基督徒實際上是太看重自己。如果人變惡了，不知感恩了，上帝怎麼能夠通過基督徒感受到懺悔、通過他們來譴責並恨自己的藝術品、威脅人類並讓自己的造物毀滅？


8-基督徒專門收斂罪人。他們說，誰有罪了，不明事理了，不懂事了，總之，誰不幸福了，誰就進神的國。你們是不是在說……不公正的人、盜賊、製毒者、偷廟人和盜墓賊？但為什麼耶穌不是為了沒罪的人而來？難道不行惡反倒成了惡？


9-基督教的信仰極端矛盾︰舊約的上帝通過摩西告誡他的信徒發財、統治，對敵人不分男女全殺，而耶穌卻宣稱，誰要是富了，權利慾強，誰要是要求智慧和聲譽，那就不能到父的身邊……究竟是誰在撒謊，摩西還是耶穌？還是那個父在送耶穌來的時候忘了和摩西說過的話？要麼是他改變了自己的主意並咒了自己立的律法，所以才讓一個使者送來完全相反的規定？


10-基督教肉體復活的念頭令人噁心，這念頭或許對蟲和蛆正合適。哪個人的靈魂會喜歡一個正在腐爛的屍體呢？而且，哪具被毀壞的軀體有能力返回原本的狀態？因為他們回答不了這種問題，他們就找無聊之極的藉口，說什麼對上帝而言什麼都有可能。


11-因為基督徒信仰的基礎太薄弱，所以必然是從一開始就分裂為不同的團組和流派，唯一共同的只是他們的名稱。


12-猶太人和基督徒有造反傾向，他們蔑視傳統，喜歡地下活動，或明或暗地反對習俗和法律。他們不公開生活，對國家完全沒有興趣，所以是文明的敵人，野蠻的開路人。


13=請基督徒從帝國的角落裡出來，參與國家生活。


原文請閱：
http://www.antichristendom.com/%E5%A1%9E%E7%88%BE%E8%98%87%E6%96%AF%EF%BC%88celsus%EF%BC%89%EF%BC%9A%E5%8F%8D%E5%9F%BA%E7%9D%A3%E7%AC%AC%E4%B8%80%E4%BA%BA/




.

leefeng

我最近因為常常生病，故不能多言。倒是寄生蟲看起來像妖怪，跟丫瘋一樣反民主反自由，不是妖怪是什麼？ ...
哈佛專家 發表於 2020/9/6 04:16

徹底根除【基督教洗腦的民主】，你個病就一定會好番的啦！

上流寄生族

我最近因為常常生病，故不能多言。倒是寄生蟲看起來像妖怪，跟丫瘋一樣反民主反自由，不是妖怪是什麼？ ...
哈佛專家 發表於 2020/9/6 04:16

虚心奉上灵芝https://www.medschool.cc/article/ganoderma 谢谢

上流寄生族

我最近因為常常生病，故不能多言。倒是寄生蟲看起來像妖怪，跟丫瘋一樣反民主反自由，不是妖怪是什麼？ ...
哈佛專家 發表於 2020/9/6 04:16

建议早睡

建议考虑可不深夜发文

谢谢

上流寄生族

我最近因為常常生病，故不能多言。倒是寄生蟲看起來像妖怪，跟丫瘋一樣反民主反自由，不是妖怪是什麼？ ...
哈佛專家 發表於 2020/9/6 04:16

敬请专心养病

敬祈早日安好

leefeng

警察打精神病患者是犯法的
哈佛專家 發表於 2020/9/6 12:48

民主國不犯法的！打不怕，會請你食蓮子羹！

哈佛專家

警察打精神病患者是犯法的

leefeng

我最近因為常常生病，故不能多言。倒是寄生蟲看起來像妖怪，跟丫瘋一樣反民主反自由，不是妖怪是什麼？ ...
哈佛專家 發表於 2020/9/6 04:16

民主派警察特喜歡焗死有精神病的民主人！你喜歡像老美這樣的民主？可以親自去試下！
冇人會阻你架！

哈佛專家

我最近因為常常生病，故不能多言。倒是寄生蟲看起來像妖怪，跟丫瘋一樣反民主反自由，不是妖怪是什麼？

上流寄生族

下流寄生蟲係妖怪
哈佛專家 發表於 2020/9/5 17:29

看指，灵犀一指
https://baike.baidu.com/item/%E7%81%B5%E7%8A%80%E4%B8%80%E6%8C%87

陆小凤最擅长的武功，名为「灵犀一指」，源于昔年九州王沈天君的乾坤第一指和老年楚留香的教诲而成，不求杀人，以压制敌人为主的武学，是天下无双，万无一失的绝技，陆小凤的成名武功。说白了就是无论对手是什么兵器，刀剑鞭矛，都能被他用右手食指和中指一下子夹住，再不能动。灵犀一指的能力就是在不利的情况，不可防的状态下，依旧可以进行防御。
「身无彩凤双飞翼，心有灵犀一点通。」

上流寄生族

下流寄生蟲係妖怪
哈佛專家 發表於 2020/9/5 17:29

同意谢谢常常不勇敢轻举妄动的你抬举

哈佛專家

下流寄生蟲係妖怪

上流寄生族

机器翻译：

塞尔苏斯（/？s（lsəs/;希腊语：Κέλσος。Kélsos）是2世纪希腊的哲学家，也是早期基督 ...塞尔苏斯对基督教发起了猛烈抨击，嘲笑了许多教条。他写道，有些犹太人说耶稣的父亲实际上是一位名叫Pantera的罗马士兵。 Origen认为这是捏造的故事。[15] [16]此外，塞尔苏斯还谈到了耶稣的奇迹，认为“耶稣通过魔术（γοητεία【goiteía【参考：great大】】）履行了他的奇迹”：[17] [18] [19]
上流寄生族 發表於 2020/9/5 15:44

魔术，魔法。。。。。。。。。英文：magic [参考 - mega大 ]

上流寄生族

首先谢谢兄 HIP HIP HURRAY!!
Celsus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For other people named Ce ...
上流寄生族 發表於 2020/9/4 18:25

机器翻译：

塞尔苏斯（/？s（lsəs/;希腊语：Κέλσος。Kélsos）是2世纪希腊的哲学家，也是早期基督教的反对者。[1]他以他的文学著作《真实的教义》（或《话语，叙述，单词；希腊语：ΛόγοςἈληθής，LogosAlēthēs）》 [2] [3]而著称，该著作在《相反的塞尔苏姆》（Contra Celsum）中的引用中独占survive头。亚历山大·奥里根（Origen）248。 《真实教义》是对基督教的最早的全面批评。它是在贾斯汀·Mart道者（可能是第一位基督教辩护者）去世后不久写于175 [4]至177 [5]之间的，可能是对他的工作的回应。[4]


内容




1作品
2参考
3资源
4进一步阅读
5外部链接


工作[编辑]
塞尔苏斯（Celsus）是《真实学说》（Logos【word言】 Alēthēs【真】）著作的作者。这本书被不断壮大的基督教社区所压制，[6]并在公元448年受瓦伦丁三世和狄奥多西二世的命令禁止，再加上Porphyry的15本攻击基督徒的书，《甲骨文的哲学》，因此没有现成的完整版本，[7] ] [3]，但可以根据Origen在他的第8卷反驳中对它的详细描述来重构，该引用广泛引用了Celsus。[8] [5] Origen的工作得以幸存，从而保留了Celsus的工作。[9]


塞尔苏斯似乎对古埃及宗教感兴趣，[10]并且他似乎知道希腊化的犹太人的标志神学，这两者都表明《真道义》是在亚历山大大帝撰写的。[11]塞尔苏斯（Celsus）在基督教遭到迫害的时候写信。[12]奥里金（Origen）表示塞尔苏斯（Celsus）是哈德良皇帝（Emperor Hadrian）统治下的伊壁鸠鲁人。[13] [14]


塞尔苏斯写道：“从一开始就存在一种古老的教义[archaios徽标]，一直由最有智慧的国家和城市以及有智慧的人维护”。他把犹太人和摩西从他引用的那些人（埃及人，叙利亚人，印第安人，波斯人，奥德里亚人，萨摩斯拉德人，伊路西尼人，海底北面人，加拉太佛哥，德鲁伊和格塔伊）中剔除，而将摩西归咎于古代宗教的腐败：那些跟随摩西成为领袖的牧羊人被笨拙的欺骗所迷惑，认为只有一个上帝，并且没有任何合理的原因……这些牧羊人和牧羊人放弃了对许多神的崇拜。”然而，塞尔苏斯最严厉的批评是留给基督徒的，他们“与世隔绝，脱离了人类”。[4]


塞尔苏斯对基督教发起了猛烈抨击，嘲笑了许多教条。他写道，有些犹太人说耶稣的父亲实际上是一位名叫Pantera的罗马士兵。 Origen认为这是捏造的故事。[15] [16]此外，塞尔苏斯还谈到了耶稣的奇迹，认为“耶稣通过魔术（γοητεία【goiteía【参考：great大】】）履行了他的奇迹”：[17] [18] [19]


哦，光明与真理！正如你们自己所记录的那样，他用自己的声音清楚地宣布，甚至会有其他人，利用邪恶的人和巫师，使用类似的奇迹，来到你们这里。和撒旦。耶稣自己并不否认这些行为至少不是神圣的，而是邪恶的人的行为。在被真理的力量逼迫的同时，他不仅公开了别人的所作所为，而且还为自己的行为定罪。那么，从同一著作中得出一个人是上帝而另一个人是巫师的结论，这不是一个悲惨的推论吗？为什么要因为这些行为而将其他人视为邪恶而不是这个人，而认为他们以他为自己的证人呢？因为他本人已经承认这些不是神圣性质的作品，而是某些欺骗者和邪恶分子的发明。[20] [21]


奥里金（Origen）在248年写了他的反驳。奥里金（Origen）有时引用，有时用释义，有时只是指称，再现并回复了塞尔苏斯的论点。由于准确性是他反驳“真相”的关键，[22]大多数学者都认为Origen是Celsus所说的可靠来源。[23] [24]


圣经学者亚瑟·德罗格（Arthur J. Droge）写道，将塞尔苏斯的观点称为多神论是错误的。相反，他是“包容性”或“质性”一神论者，而不是犹太人的“专有”或“定量”一神论者； [4]历史学家伍特·汉纳格拉夫（Wouter Hanegraaff）解释说：“前者有等级的下层神灵空间，而后者没有[25]塞尔苏斯表明自己熟悉犹太血统的故事。[26] [[url = https：//zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedialease_clarify]需要澄清[/ url] ]]塞尔苏斯认为基督徒并非没有生意成功（negotiis中的infructuosi），他们希望他们成为好公民，保留自己的信仰，但崇拜皇帝，并与同胞一起捍卫帝国。[27]这是代表团结与相互容忍的恳切而令人震惊的呼吁。塞尔苏斯最痛苦的抱怨之一是基督徒拒绝与民间社会合作，以及他们鄙视当地人。

上流寄生族

The True Word is a lost treatise in which the ancient Greek philosopher Celsus addressed ...
上流寄生族 發表於 2020/9/5 15:34

机器翻译：


真话


维基百科，自由的百科全书


真实的话语（或话语，记述，教义；希腊语：Λόγος Ἀληθής，Logos话 Alēthēs真）是一部遗失的论文，古希腊哲学家塞尔苏斯（Celsus）谈到了早期基督教的许多主要观点，并驳斥或反对其有效性。在《真理的话》中，塞尔苏斯以三种方式攻击基督教。通过驳斥其哲学主张，将其标记为与未受教育的下层阶级有关的现象，并警告他的听众这对罗马帝国构成危险，来驳斥其哲学主张。关于该作品的所有信息仅存在于克里斯蒂安·奥里根（Christian Origen）于七十年后写的《反对         塞尔瑟姆》（Contra Celsum）中的大量引文中。据信，这些内容就目前而言是准确的，但可能无法全面反映原始作品。


内容1在塞尔苏斯之前对基督教的批评2 Celsus及其工作3哲学和神学争论4基督教的地位和吸引力5基督教对罗马构成威胁6笔记7参考塞尔苏斯之前对基督教的批评塞尔苏斯只是罗马作家和哲学家的悠久传统中的一位作家，他们写作并大声疾呼反对基督教，认为他们的学说要么是难以理解的，要么是彻头彻尾的愚蠢。大多数罗马公民和帝国政府对基督徒的主要问题是他们坚决拒绝参加对皇帝和罗马国家定期作出的必要牺牲，这些牺牲是罗马政治，宗教和宗教的组成部分。文化。大多数罗马人无法理解基督徒对自己的优越性的坚持以及对他们看来唯一的救赎之路的坚持。 [需要引用]他们也无法理解基督教徒的说法，即基督教是独特的宗教，源远流长。当罗马哲学家知道基督教相对较早脱离了犹太教[引用]，并且仍然使用古老的犹太文本来阐述其神学和支持其宗教主张时。 [引用]这些罗马作家经常自称是帝国和罗马社会的忠实成员，也“因基督教立场对社会和对公认的国家宗教的表像不连贯而感到困扰”。 [1]所有这些因素导致基督徒被列为社会的敌人。罗马哲学家还抨击了基督教的道德和伦理原则，因为“第一世纪的基督教还没有发展出一种令人信服的信仰体系或固定的教义典范，就可以由此产生这种信仰”。 [2]塞尔苏斯只是反对基督教的众多信徒之一，其中包括卢西安。
塞尔苏斯和他的工作塞尔苏斯是希腊人或罗马人，在公元2世纪下半叶写作。关于他的出身或生活知之甚少。原始形式的作品已丢失，《真道》仅作为基督教学者奥里根（Origen）引用克尔苏斯来反驳他的作品的摘录而幸存。 [3] Origen指出，塞尔苏斯来自公元2世纪上半叶，尽管大多数现代学者已达成普遍共识，塞尔苏斯可能写于公元170至180年左右。 [4]大多数现代学者都同意塞尔苏斯不依赖于其他基督教批评者所使用的“谣言和传闻证据” [5]，而是借鉴了他自己的观察结果，并展示了希伯来圣经和新约圣经的知识。基督教圣经以及其他犹太和基督教著作的遗嘱。
哲学和神学论点塞尔苏斯在他的《真实话语》中的第一个主要观点是反驳基督教的有效性。在他看来，基督教神学是基于将错误的东方哲学思想草草结合在一起的。他说，基督徒将“把从古代资源中汲取的错误观点编织在一起，并大声宣扬它们”。 [6]塞尔苏斯（Celsus）对基督教教义进行了一点一点的批评，以及为什么不应该有人相信它。他否认耶稣是处女，并指控玛丽是丈夫的通奸者。他的理论并不陌生，就像当时的犹太人一样。 [引用文献]其余的基督教故事-现在构成了基督教圣经-与希腊和罗马的强大而传奇的传说相比，塞尔苏斯显得很平淡无趣多彩的众神。塞尔苏斯还发现，与世俗哲学相比，基督教哲学缺乏东西，并宣称“希腊人的情况要好得多”。 [7]塞尔苏斯以柏拉图为希腊哲学家的代表，据他所说，在比较这两种哲学传统时，基督教显得更加糟糕，因为“柏拉图没有吹牛和虚假罪”，[8]

上流寄生族

The True Word - Wikipediaen.wikipedia.org › wiki › The_True_Word

翻譯這個網頁


The True Word is a lost treatise in which the ancient Greek philosopher Celsus addressed many principal points of Early Christianity and refuted or argued ...



（Celsus 作品
）


The True WordFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Jump to navigationJump to search

The True Word (or Discourse, Account, Doctrine; Greek: Λόγος Ἀληθής, Logos Alēthēs) is a lost treatise in which the ancient Greek philosopher Celsus addressed many principal points of Early Christianity and refuted or argued against their validity. In The True Word, Celsus attacked Christianity in three ways; by refuting its philosophical claims, by marking it as a phenomenon associated with the uneducated and lower class, and by cautioning his audience that it was a danger to the Roman Empire. All information concerning the work exists only in the extensive quotations from it in the Contra Celsum ("Against Celsus") written some seventy years later by the Christian Origen. These are believed to be accurate as far as they go, but may not give a fully comprehensive picture of the original work.

Contents

• 1Criticism of Christianity before Celsus
• 2Celsus and his work
• 3Philosophical and theological arguments
• 4Status and the appeal of Christianity
• 5Christianity as a danger to Rome
• 6Notes
• 7References

Criticism of Christianity before Celsus[edit]

Celsus was only one writer in a long tradition of Roman writers and philosophers who wrote and spoke out against Christianity, feeling that their doctrines were either inscrutable or downright foolish. The primary problem that most Roman citizens and the Imperial government had regarding the Christians was their adamant refusal to participate in the required sacrifices that were regularly made to the Emperor and the Roman state, sacrifices that were an integral part of Roman politics, religion, and culture. Most Romans could not understand the Christians' insistence on their own superiority and their insistence upon their apparently exclusive path to salvation.[citation needed] They could also not understand Christianity's claims that they were a unique religion with a long history reaching back to antiquity[citation needed] , when the Roman philosophers knew that Christianity had broken off from Judaism[citation needed] relatively recently and still used ancient Jewish texts both to formulate their theology and to support their religious claims.[citation needed] These Roman writers, who often professed to be loyal members of the Empire and Roman society, were also "troubled by the seeming incoherence of the Christian position toward society and towards the recognized religion of the state".[1] All of these factors led to Christians being classified as enemies of society. Roman philosophers also attacked Christian moral and ethical principles because "the Christianity of the first century had yet to develop an assailable system of belief or a fixed canon of writings from which such beliefs could be educed".[2] Celsus was only one among many, including Lucian, who wrote against Christianity.

Celsus and his work[edit]

Celsus was either a Greek or a Roman who wrote during the latter half of the 2nd century AD. Very little is known about his origins or life. The work in its original form has been lost and the True Word survives only as excerpts from a work by the Christian scholar Origen, who quoted Celsus to rebut him.[3] Origen stated that Celsus was from the first half of the 2nd century A.D., although the majority of modern scholars have come to a general consensus that Celsus probably wrote around 170 to 180 A.D.[4] Most modern scholars are in agreement that Celsus did not rely on the "rumors and hearsay evidence" [5] that many other Christian detractors of the time period used, but rather drew upon his own observations and displayed knowledge of both the Hebrew Bible and New Testament of the Christian Bible, as well as other Jewish and Christian writings.

Philosophical and theological arguments[edit]

Celsus' first main point in his True Word was to refute the validity of Christianity. In his opinion Christian theology was based on an amalgamation of false eastern philosophical ideas hastily tied together. He stated that Christians would "weave together erroneous opinions drawn from ancient sources and trumpet them aloud".[6] Celsus gave a point by point critique of Christian doctrine, and why it should not have been believed by anyone. He denied the virgin birth of Jesus, and accused Mary of being an adulteress turned out by her husband. His theory was not new, as even Jews at that time were saying the same.[citation needed] The remainder of Christian stories – what now makes up the Christian Bible- Celsus found very insipid and unappealing compared to Greek and Roman legends of powerful and colorful gods. Celsus also found Christian philosophy lacking when compared to secular philosophy, and declared that "things are stated much better among the Greeks".[7] Celsus used Plato as the representative for Greek philosophers and, according to him, when comparing the two philosophical traditions Christianity appeared far worse, as "Plato is not guilty of boasting and falsehood",[8] a crime which Celsus obviously feels is a trademark of Christian theologians. The only connection Celsus made between Greek philosophy and Christianity was when he asserted that "Jesus perverted the words of the philosopher" (i.e. Plato).[9]

When compared with the gods of Roman and Greek mythology, Celsus found the Christian God sadly lacking, and declared that he could not be a god as he was neither all-knowing nor all-powerful. Celsus could deduce no explanation for the actions of the Christian God, such as the floods, natural disasters, and the introduction of evil into the world, except that God wanted to draw attention to his greatness because he felt humanity was giving him "less than his due".[10] Celsus concluded that Christians used the explanation of God "testing" them to disguise the fact that their God was not powerful enough to successfully fight Satan, but was instead "helpless".[11] Celsus wrote that Satan was either a mortal invention used by Christians to frighten others into believing their philosophies and joining them, or if he did indeed exist then he was proof that God was not all-powerful, but rather a weak lesser god and a bad one, for only a vindictive and insecure being would punish mankind for being tricked by an evil that he has been too weak to stop.[12] The apparent "blind faith" of the Christians was bewildering to Celsus, and he used it to further support his claim that Christianity was a false religion. In his opinion, the main tenet of Christianity was "Do not ask questions, just believe" and "Thy faith will save thee".[13]

Status and the appeal of Christianity[edit]

Celsus complained that Christianity was a phenomenon limited primarily to the lower class. He claimed that Christians actively sought out and converted the ignorant, uneducated, and lower class, as they were the only people who would believe in such a ridiculous theology and blindly follow its doctrines.[14] If an individual was from the upper class, and therefore well educated and naturally of good character, they would not be converted because they could not possibly believe in the absurd assumptions one had to in order to be considered "Christian". Celsus revealed himself to be a member of the upper class when he makes his statements regarding Jesus; who obviously could not be the son of god as he was born a peasant. The True Word stated that Mary would have been unworthy to be noticed by God "because she was neither rich nor of royal rank".[15] Celsus also claimed that Christianity was against personal betterment, as that could cause their followers to discover the fallacies within their religion. Celsus declared that Christians convert by "lead[ing] on wicked men by empty hopes, and to persuade them to despise better things, saying that if they refrain from them it will be better...".[16][17]

Christianity as a danger to Rome[edit]

Celsus’ main argument against Christianity, and why he attacked it with such vigor, was that he considered it a divisive and destructive force that would harm both the Roman Empire and society. Adherence to the state supported Roman religion was compulsory and the Roman authorities felt it was necessary for the effective management of the political system. One of the most integral parts of the Roman state religion was reverence and occasional sacrifices for the Emperor, an act that Christians continually refused to participate in, as in their opinion it came too close to idolatry and worship of a God that was not their own.

Celsus listed many reasons for how his Roman readers could easily deduce that Christianity was endangering their unity and the stability of the Empire. Christianity originated from Judaism, whose adherents, although living within the Empire, had already revolted against Roman rule several times. The Christian community then became further divided among themselves, and Celsus complained that "matters are determined in different ways by the various sects".[18] This dissension between different factions within Christianity proved to the Romans that Christians who could not even draw together under their own shared beliefs were naturally a divisive people and not only caused friction within their own philosophy but would disrupt the unity of the Empire. Finally Celsus and other Roman writers believed that "Christians are dangerous precisely because they put the advancement of their beliefs above the common good and the welfare of the state".[19]

The secrecy in which Christians met and practiced was another problem for Celsus. He commented that they "entered into secret associations with each other contrary to law".[20] Celsus stated that there was nothing wrong with swearing allegiance to a king or emperor, as he provided the stable environment in which all citizens could freely live, and in return it was the duty of each Roman citizen to assist the Emperor and "labor with him in the maintenance of justice".[21]

Celsus provided only one solution to solve the problems that he believed Christianity would inevitably create within the Empire. He commanded that Christians must both respect the Emperor and perform rituals to the gods of the Roman state. If they could not or would not participate in the Imperial religion they must not "take any share in the affairs of life; but… depart hence with all speed and leave no posterity behind them".[22]

Notes

上流寄生族

[Celsus ]
克理索（Celsus），又譯塞爾修斯、瑟爾索。生卒年不祥 ...他認為基督教義是羅馬帝國的威脅【结果：成真】
上流寄生族 發表於 2020/9/5 15:25

基督教，更加是任何共产党的威脅【结果：成真】

（实例：苏联，东欧，1989）

上流寄生族

[Celsus ]
https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%85%8B%E7%90%86%E7%B4%A2


克理索[編輯]維基百科，自由的百科全書



跳至導覽跳至搜尋

克理索（Celsus），又譯塞爾修斯、瑟爾索。生卒年不祥，為2世紀羅馬帝國的哲學家。

目錄

• 1作品
• 2來源
• 3觀點
• 4參考文獻

作品[編輯]

他很可能是在馬可·奧勒留皇帝統治時期（161-180年）寫了一本反基督教的書，名為《真教義》（On the True Doctrine）。此書已經不存在。[1] 他熟悉猶大教與基督教的經典，捍衛羅馬傳統多神宗教。克理索是第一位以傳統價值觀和古代宗教的名義，以羅馬政府要求的公民職責名義反對基督教信條。同時為哲學理性相對於基督教信仰的優先性辯護的人。[2]

來源[編輯]

今天我們對克理索的認知依賴於奧利金對《真教義》的回應，他寫下巨著《駁克理索》。奧利金試圖用那個時代流行的伯拉圖哲學來說明基督教信仰的合理性。[3] 此書超越了其他的基督教護教書籍，把敵對基督教的巨人歌利亞徹底擊潰。[4] 是我們目前了解克理索觀點的唯一來源，在此書中因為奧利金在引用了克理索很長的摘錄。克理索用反諷的方式對基督教進行批評。

觀點[編輯]

他批評基督教的觀點主要：首先，他認同羅馬的流行宗教，他否認耶穌具有任何神性，只是一個普通的猶太人，基督徒把耶穌當作神的獨子來崇拜；其次他把基督信仰當作一種新的哲學來看待，而且還是一種低劣的哲學，他認為猶太人和基督徒顯然不可能納入他所支持的宗教、哲學和政治體系之中。也就是說，他維護多神論與一神論的混合； 還有，他認為基督教義是羅馬帝國的威脅【结果：成真】，鼓動基督徒放棄信仰，歸信羅馬的多神國教，第四他認為，基督教信仰強調毫無理性的「單純相信，引思想簡單、缺乏文化的人做信徒，確保它的巨大成功有時甚至認為它們是一種毫無價值的迷信，只能優先在老年婦女、孩子和奴隸中吸收信徒，這種宗教對羅馬帝國無益。[5]

參考文獻[編輯]

• ^ 奧利金; 石敏敏譯. 《駁塞爾修斯》 第一版. 北京: 三聯書店. 2013年: 6.
  
• ^ 奧利金; 石敏敏譯. 《駁塞爾修斯》 第一版. 北京: 三聯書店. 2013年: 15.
  
• ^ 陶理 (編). 《基督教二千年》 第一版. 香港: 海天書樓. 1997年: 107頁.
  
• ^ 奧爾森; 吳瑞成譯. 《神學的故事》 第一版. 台北: 校園出版社. 2002年: 117.
  
• ^ 奧利金; 石敏敏譯. 《駁塞爾修斯》 第一版. 北京: 三聯出版. 2013年: 17頁.
  

分類：

• 古羅馬哲學家
• 反基督教
• 基督教評論家

上流寄生族

首先谢谢兄 HIP HIP HURRAY!!
Celsus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



For other people named Ce ...
上流寄生族 發表於 2020/9/4 18:25

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celsus

References[edit]

• ^ Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Celsus". Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press.
• ^ Hoffmann p.29
• ^ Jump up to:a b Ulrich R. Rohmer (15 January 2014). Ecce Homo: A collection of different views on Jesus. BookRix GmbH & Company KG. p. 98. ISBN 978-3-7309-7603-6.
• ^ Jump up to:a b c d Hanegraaff p.22
• ^ Jump up to:a b Chadwick, H., Origen: Contra Celsum, CUP (1965), p. xxviii
• ^ Nixey, The Darkening Age, p. 32
• ^ Hoffmann p.29
• ^ Hoffmann p.29
• ^ Origen, Contra Celsum, preface 4.
• ^ Chadwick, H., Origen: Contra Celsum. CUP (1965), 3, 17, 19; 8, 58. He quotes an Egyptian musician named Dionysius in CC 6, 41.
• ^ Chadwick, H., Origen: Contra Celsum, CUP (1965), p. xxviii-xxix
• ^ Chadwick, H., Origen: Contra Celsum. CUP (1965), 8, 69
• ^ Gottheil, Richard; Krauss, Samuel. "Celsus". Jewish Encyclopedia. Retrieved 2007-05-18.
• ^ Chadwick, H. Origen: Contra Celsum, introduction.
• ^ Contra Celsum by Origen, Henry Chadwick, 1980, ISBN 0-521-29576-9, page 32
• ^ Patrick, John, The Apology of Origen in Reply to Celsus, 2009, ISBN 1-110-13388-X, pages 22–24,
• ^ Hendrik van der Loos (1965). The Miracles of Jesus. Brill Publishers. Retrieved 14 June 2012. According to Celsus Jesus performed His miracles by sorcery (γοητεία); ditto in II, 14; II, 16; II, 44; II, 48; II, 49 (Celsus puts Jesus' miraculous signs on a par with those among men).
• ^ Margaret Y. MacDonald (3 October 1996). Early Christian Women and Pagan Opinion. Cambridge University Press. Retrieved 14 June 2012. Celsus calls Jesus a sorcerer. He argues that the miracles of Jesus are on the same level as: 'the works of sorcerers who profess to do wonderful miracles, and the accomplishments of those who are taught by the Egyptians, who for a few obols make known their sacred lore in the middle of the market-place and drive daemons out of men and blow away diseases and invoke the souls of heroes, displaying expensive banquets and dining tables and cakes and dishes which are non-existent, and who make things move as though they were alive although they are not really so, but only appear as such in the imagination.'
• ^ Philip Francis Esler (2000). The Early Christian World, Volume 2. Taylor & Francis. Retrieved 14 June 2012. To disprove the deity of Christ required an explanation of his miracles which were recorded in scripture. Celsus does not deny the fact of Jesus' miracles, but rather concentrates on the means by which they were performed. Perhaps influenced by rabbinical sources, Celsus attributes Jesus' miracles to his great skills as a magician.
• ^ Ernest Cushing Richardson, Bernhard Pick (1905). The Ante-Nicene fathers: translations of the writings of the fathers down to A.D. 325, Volume 4. Scribner's. Retrieved 14 June 2012. But Celsus, wishing to assimilate the miracles of Jesus to the works of human sorcery, says in express terms as follows: "O light and truth! he distinctly declares, with his own voice, as ye yourselves have recorded, that there will come to you even others, employing miracles of a similar kind, who are wicked men, and sorcerers; and Satan. So that Jesus himself does not deny that these works at least are not at all divine, but are the acts of wicked men; and being compelled by the force of truth, he at the same time not only laid open the doings of others, but convicted himself of the same acts. Is it not, then, a miserable inference, to conclude from the same works that the one is God and the other sorcerers? Why ought the others, because of these acts, to be accounted wicked rather than this man, seeing they have him as their witness against himself? For he has himself acknowledged that these are not the works of a divine nature, but the inventions of certain deceivers, and of thoroughly wicked men."
• ^ Origen (30 June 2004). Origen Against Celsus, Volume 2. Kessinger Publishing. Retrieved 14 June 2012. But Celsus, wishing to assimilate the miracles of Jesus to the works of human sorcery, says in express terms as follows: "O light and truth! he distinctly declares, with his own voice, as ye yourselves have recorded that there are as ye yourselves have recorded, that there will come to you even others, employing miracles of a similar kind, who are wicked men, and sorcerers; and he calls him who makes use of such devices, one Satan. So that Jesus himself does not deny that these works at least are not at all divine, but are the acts of wicked men; and being compelled by the force of truth, he at the same time not only laid open the doings of others, but convicted himself of the same acts. Is it not, then, a miserable inference, to conclude from the same works that the one is God and the other sorcerers? Why ought the others, because of these acts, to be accounted wicked rather than this man, seeing they have him as their witness against himself? For he has himself acknowledged that these are not the works of a divine nature; but the inventions of certain deceivers, and of thoroughly wicked men."
• ^ James D. Tabor, The Jesus Dynasty: The Hidden History of Jesus, His Royal Family, and the Birth of Christianity, Simon and Schuster, 2006. p 64
• ^ David Brewster & Richard R. Yeo, The Edinburgh Encyclopaedia, Volume 8, Routledge, 1999. p 362
• ^ Bernhard Lang, International Review of Biblical Studies, Volume 54, Publisher BRILL, 2009. p 401
• ^ Hanegraaff p.38
• ^ Martin, Dale B. (2004). Inventing Superstition: From the Hippocratics to the Christians. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. pp. 141, 143. ISBN 0-674-01534-7.
• ^ Terrot Reavely Glover, The Conflict Of Religions In The Early Roman Empire, (Methuen & Co., 1910 [Kindle Edition]), chap. VIII., p. 431
• ^ Glover, p. 427
• ^ Glover, p. 410
• ^ Glover, p. 412
• ^ Robert Louis Wilken, The Christians as the Romans Saw Them, (Yale: University Press, 2nd edition, 2003)

Sources[edit]

• Nixey, Catherine (2017). The Darkening Age: The Christian Destruction of the Classical World. London, UK: Macmillan. ISBN 978-1-5098-1606-4.
• Hanegraaff, Wouter (2012). Esotericism and the Academy: Rejected Knowledge in Western Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521196215.
• R. Joseph Hoffmann (1987). On the True Doctrine: A Discourse Against the Christians. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-504151-4.

External links[edit]

• "Celsus the Platonist". Catholic Encyclopedia. 3. 1908.
• "Celsus". Encyclopædia Britannica. 5 (11th ed.). 1911.
• [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FileD-icon.svg][/url] "Celsus". The Jewish Encyclopedia. 1901–1906.
• Origen's Text on Celsus}
• full text of The Arguments of Celsus Against the Christians in Google Books
• Works by Celsus at Project Gutenberg
• Works by Celsus at Open Library

Authority control

BNE: XX1131395 BNF: cb11895733n (data) CANTIC: a10063286 GND: 118519883 ICCU: IT\ICCU\RAVV\012642 ISNI: 0000 0000 6851 1852 LCCN: n50060680 NKC: uk2005272019 NLA: 49885973 NSK: 000539576 NTA: 069882517 RERO: 02-A000030225 SELIBR: 272372 SNAC: w6cp1qdk SUDOC: 026774283 Trove: 1507586 VIAF: 268390697 WorldCat Identities: lccn-n50060680

Categories:

• 2nd-century Christianity
• 2nd-century philosophers
• Hellenistic-era philosophers
• [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categoryagan_anti-Gnosticism]Pagan anti-Gnosticism[/url]
• Critics of Christianity

上流寄生族

塞爾蘇斯（Celsus）是有紀錄以來第一位發出反基督繳文的戰士，他的《潘台拉：耶穌的生父？》
分析了耶穌的 ...
leefeng 發表於 2020/9/2 02:19

首先谢谢兄 HIP HIP HURRAY!!https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celsus
CelsusFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Jump to navigationJump to searchFor other people named Celsus, see Celsus (disambiguation).

Origen, Contra Celsum (1676 edition)

Celsus (/ˈsɛlsəs/; Greek: Κέλσος. Kélsos) was a 2nd-century Greek philosopher and opponent of early Christianity.[1] He is known for his literary work, On The True Doctrine (or Discourse, Account, Word; Greek: Λόγος Ἀληθής, Logos Alēthēs),[2][3] which survives exclusively in quotations from it in Contra Celsum, a refutation written in 248 by Origen of Alexandria. On The True Doctrine is the earliest known comprehensive criticism of Christianity. It was written between about 175[4] and 177,[5] shortly after the death of Justin Martyr (who was possibly the first Christian apologist), and was probably a response to his work.[4]

Contents

• 1Work
• 2References
• 3Sources
• 4Further reading
• 5External links

Work[edit]

Celsus was the author of a work titled On The True Doctrine (Logos Alēthēs). The book was suppressed by the growing Christian community,[6] and banned in 448 AD by order of Valentinian III and Theodosius II, along with Porphyry's 15 books attacking the Christians, The Philosophy from Oracles, so no complete copies are extant,[7][3] but it can be reconstructed from Origen's detailed account of it in his 8 volume refutation, which quotes Celsus extensively.[8][5] Origen's work has survived and thereby preserved Celsus' work with it.[9]

Celsus seems to have been interested in Ancient Egyptian religion,[10] and he seemed to know of Hellenistic Jewish logos-theology, both of which suggest The True Doctrine was composed in Alexandria.[11] Celsus wrote at a time when Christianity was being persecuted.[12] Origen indicates that Celsus was an Epicurean living under the Emperor Hadrian.[13][14]

Celsus writes that "there is an ancient doctrine [archaios logos] which has existed from the beginning, which has always been maintained by the wisest nations and cities and wise men". He leaves Jews and Moses out of those he cites (Egyptians, Syrians, Indians, Persians, Odrysians, Samothracians, Eleusinians, Hyperboreans, Galactophagoi, Druids, and Getae), and instead blames Moses for the corruption of the ancient religion: "the goatherds and shepherds who followed Moses as their leader were deluded by clumsy deceits into thinking that there was only one God, [and] without any rational cause ... these goatherds and shepherds abandoned the worship of many gods". However, Celsus' harshest criticism was reserved for Christians, who "wall themselves off and break away from the rest of mankind".[4]

Celsus initiated a critical attack on Christianity, ridiculing many of its dogmas. He wrote that some Jews said Jesus' father was actually a Roman soldier named Pantera. Origen considered this a fabricated story.[15][16] In addition, Celsus addressed the miracles of Jesus, holding that "Jesus performed his miracles by sorcery (γοητεία)":[17][18][19]

O light and truth! he distinctly declares, with his own voice, as ye yourselves have recorded, that there will come to you even others, employing miracles of a similar kind, who are wicked men, and sorcerers; and Satan. So that Jesus himself does not deny that these works at least are not at all divine, but are the acts of wicked men; and being compelled by the force of truth, he at the same time not only laid open the doings of others, but convicted himself of the same acts. Is it not, then, a miserable inference, to conclude from the same works that the one is God and the other sorcerers? Why ought the others, because of these acts, to be accounted wicked rather than this man, seeing they have him as their witness against himself? For he has himself acknowledged that these are not the works of a divine nature, but the inventions of certain deceivers, and of thoroughly wicked men.[20][21]

Origen wrote his refutation in 248. Sometimes quoting, sometimes paraphrasing, sometimes merely referring, Origen reproduces and replies to Celsus' arguments. Since accuracy was essential to his refutation of The True Doctrine,[22] most scholars agree that Origen is a reliable source for what Celsus said.[23][24]

Biblical scholar Arthur J. Droge has written that it is incorrect to refer to Celsus' perspective as polytheism. Instead, he was an "inclusive" or "qualitative" monotheist, as opposed to the Jewish "exclusive" or "quantitative" monotheism;[4] historian Wouter Hanegraaff explains that "the former has room for a hierarchy of lower deities which do not detract from the ultimate unity of the One."[25] Celsus shows himself familiar with the story of Jewish origins.[26][[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedialease_clarify]clarification needed[/url]] Conceding that Christians are not without success in business (infructuosi in negotiis), Celsus wants them to be good citizens, to retain their own belief but worship the emperors and join their fellow citizens in defending the empire.[27] It is an earnest and striking appeal on behalf of unity and mutual toleration. One of Celsus' most bitter complaints is of the refusal of Christians to cooperate with civil society, and their contempt for local customs and the ancient religions. The Christians viewed these as idolatrous and inspired by evil spirits, whereas polytheists like Celsus thought of them as the works of the Daemons, or the god's ministers, who ruled mankind in his place to keep him from the pollution of mortality.[28] Celsus attacks the Christians as feeding off faction and disunity, and accuses them of converting the vulgar and ignorant, while refusing to debate wise men.[29] As for their opinions regarding their sacred mission and exclusive holiness, Celsus responds by deriding their insignificance, comparing them to a swarm of bats, or ants creeping out of their nest, or frogs holding a symposium round a swamp, or worms in conventicle in a corner of the mud.[30] It is not known how many were Christians at the time of Celsus (the Jewish population of the empire may have been about 6.6-10% in a population of 60 million to quote one reference.[31]