Celsus Was the First Identifiable Historical Figure to Coin the Term 'Christian'

The clearest example I see so far appears at the beginning of Book Four.  I have yet to come across the specific term 'Christianity' in his writings but Celsus acknowledges that Celsus coined the term - ἀπὸ τοῦ πλήθους - to denote those who belong to the (Great?) Church:

The first point which Celsus brings forward, in his desire to throw discredit upon Christianity (διαβαλεῖν χριστιανισμόν), is, that the Christians entered into secret associations with each other contrary to law, saying, that of associations some are public, and that these are in accordance with the laws; others, again, secret, and maintained in violation of the laws. [Against Celsus 1:1]

Celsus next proceeds to say, that the system of doctrine, viz., Judaism, upon which Christianity depends (τὸν ἰουδαϊσμόν, οὗ χριστιανισμὸς ἤρτηται.) was barbarous in its origin. And with an appearance of fairness, he does not reproach it because of its origin among barbarians, but gives the latter credit for their ability in discovering (such) doctrines. To this, however, he adds the statement, that the Greeks are more skilful than any others in judging, establishing, and reducing to practice the discoveries of barbarous nations. Now this is our answer to his allegations, and our defence of the truths contained in Christianity (εἰς ἀπολογίαν περὶ τῶν ἐν χριστιανισμῷ κειμένων), that if any one were to come from the study of Grecian opinions and usages to the Gospel, he would not only decide that its doctrines were true, but would by practice establish their truth, and supply whatever seemed wanting, from a Grecian point of view, to their demonstration, and thus confirm the truth of Christianity (κατασκευάζων τὴν χριστιανισμοῦ ἀληθότητα). [ibid 1:2]

Moreover, all the mysteries that are celebrated everywhere throughout Greece and barbarous countries, although held in secret, have no discredit thrown upon them, so that it is in vain that he endeavours to calumniate the secret doctrines of Christianity (ἀκριβῶς τὸ κρύφιον τοῦ χριστιανισμοῦ διαβάλλει αὐτό), seeing he does not correctly understand its nature. [ibid 1:7]

It is with a certain eloquence, indeed, that he appears to advocate the cause of those who bear witness to the truth of Christianity by their death (τοῖς μαρτυροῦσι τῷ χριστιανισμῷ μέχρι θανάτου), in the following words: And I do not maintain that if a man, who has adopted a system of good doctrine, is to incur danger from men on that account, he should either apostatize, or feign apostasy, or openly deny his opinions. And he condemns those who, while holding the Christian views (τὰ χριστιανισμοῦ προσποιουμένων), either pretend that they do not, or deny them, saying that he who holds a certain opinion ought not to feign recantation, or publicly disown it. [ibid 1.8]

For as among such persons are frequently to be found wicked men, who, taking advantage of the ignorance of those who are easily deceived, lead them away whither they will, so also, he says, is the case among Christians. And he asserts that certain persons who do not wish either to give or receive a reason for their belief, keep repeating, Do not examine, but believe! and, Your faith will save you! And he alleges that such also say, The wisdom of this life is bad, but that foolishness is a good thing! To which we have to answer, that if it were possible for all to leave the business of life, and devote themselves to philosophy, no other method ought to be adopted by any one, but this alone. For in the Christian system (τῷ χριστιανισμῷ) also it will be found that there is, not to speak at all arrogantly, at least as much of investigation into articles of belief, and of explanation of dark sayings, occurring in the prophetical writings, and of the parables in the Gospels, and of countless other things, which either were narrated or enacted with a symbolic signification, (as is the case with other systems).[ibid 1.9]

It seems, then, to be not from a love of truth, but from a spirit of hatred, that Celsus makes these statements, his object being to asperse the origin of Christianity (τῆς ἀρχῆς τοῦ χριστιανισμοῦ), which is connected with Judaism. [ibid 1.16]

The rite of circumcision, however, which began with Abraham, and was discontinued by Jesus, who desired that His disciples should not practise it, is not before us for explanation; for the present occasion does not lead us to speak of such things, but to make an effort to refute the charges brought against the doctrine of the Jews by Celsus, who thinks that he will be able the more easily to establish the falsity of Christianity (οἰομένου τάχιον ψευδοποιήσειν τὸν χριστιανισμόν), if, by assailing its origin in Judaism, he can show that the latter also is untrue. [ibid 1.22]

Could it have come to pass without divine assistance, that Jesus, desiring during these years to spread abroad His words and teaching, should have been so successful, that everywhere throughout the world, not a few persons, Greeks as well as Barbarians, learned as well as ignorant, adopted His doctrine, so that they struggled, even to death in defence of Christianity (ὥστε μέχρι θανάτου ἀγωνίζεσθαι ὑπὲρ χριστιανισμοῦ), rather than deny it, which no one is ever related to have done for any other system? [ibid 1.26]

And although Celsus, or the Jew whom he has introduced, may treat with mockery what I am going to say, I shall say it nevertheless—that many have been converted to Christianity (προσεληλύθασι χριστιανισμῷ) as if against their will, some sort of spirit having suddenly transformed their minds from a hatred of the doctrine to a readiness to die in its defence, and having appeared to them either in a waking vision or a dream of the night. [ibid 1.46]

It were indeed to be desired, that all the accusers of Christianity (καὶ κατηγορεῖν χριστιανισμοῦ) were equally ignorant with Celsus, not only of the facts, but of the bare letter of Scripture, and would so direct their assaults against it, that their arguments might not have the least available influence in shaking, I do not say the faith, but the little faith of unstable and temporary believers. [ibid 1.49]

And I remember that I pressed the Jew, who was deemed a learned man, very hard with this passage; and he, being perplexed about it, gave such an answer as was in keeping with his Judaistic views (τῷ ἑαυτοῦ ἰουδαϊσμῷ ἀκόλουθα), saying that the words, Your throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of Your kingdom, are spoken of the God of all things; and these, You have loved righteousness and hated iniquity, therefore Your God has anointed You, etc., refer to the Messiah. [ibid 1.56] Chapter 57

I assert, therefore, in answer to such statements as the above, that it is clear to all who are able to institute an intelligent and candid examination into the history of the apostles of Jesus, that it was by help of a divine power that these men taught Christianity (ἐδίδασκον οὗτοι τὸν χριστιανισμὸν), and succeeded in leading others to embrace the word of God. [ibid 1.62]

the assailants of Christianity (δὲ κατήγοροι τοῦ χριστιανισμοῦ) do not see in how many persons the passions have been brought under restraint, and the flood of wickedness checked, and savage manners softened, by means of the Gospel.[ibid 1.64]

And from the narrative that follows, it is manifest that he, as being yet a Jew, and living according to their traditions, and despising those who were beyond the pale of Judaism (καταφρονῶν τῶν ἔξω τοῦ ἰουδαϊσμοῦ), stood in need of a vision to lead him to communicate to Cornelius (who was not an Israelite according to the flesh), and to those who were with him, the word of faith. [ibid 2.1]

Now, if Celsus had been acquainted with all these circumstances, he would not have represented the Jew holding such language as this to the converts from Judaism (τοὺς ἀπὸ ἰουδαϊσμοῦ πιστεύοντας τότοὺς ἀπὸ ἰουδαϊσμοῦ πιστεύοντας τό): What induced you, my fellow citizens, to abandon the law of your fathers, and to allow your minds to be led captive by him with whom we have just conversed, and thus be most ridiculously deluded, so as to become deserters from us to another name, and to the practices of another life (εἰς ἄλλον βίον;)? [ibid]

Now, since we are upon the subject of Peter, and of the teachers of Christianity to the circumcision (τῶν διδαξάντων τοὺς ἐν τῇ περιτομῇ τὸν χριστιανισμόν), I do not deem it out of place to quote a certain declaration of Jesus taken from the Gospel according to John, and to give the explanation of the same. [ibid 2.2]

Or how is it a charge against Christianity (ποῖον δὲ ἔγκλημα χριστιανισμῷ ἐστιν), that John, who baptized Jesus, was a Jew? For although He was a Jew, it does not follow that every believer, whether a convert from heathenism or from Judaism, must yield a literal obedience to the law of Moses. [ibid 2.4]

But, in the next place, as this Jew of his disparages the doctrine regarding the resurrection of the dead, and the divine judgment, and of the rewards to be bestowed upon the just, and of the fire which is to devour the wicked, as being stale opinions, and thinks that he will overthrow Christianity by asserting that there is nothing new in its teaching upon these points [ibid 2.5]

But suppose now that He had been betrayed by some one of His disciples, who was possessed by a worse spirit than Judas, and who had completely poured out, as it were, all the words which he had heard from Jesus, what would this contribute to an accusation against Jesus or Christianity (Ἰησοῦ ἢ χριστιανισμοῦ συμβάλλεται)? And how will this demonstrate its doctrine to be false? [ibid 2.11]

But Christians alone, according to the prediction of their Saviour, You shall be brought before governors and kings for My sake, are urged up to their last breath by their judges to deny Christianity (ἐξομοσάμενοι τὸν χριστιανισμὸν), and to sacrifice according to the public customs; and after the oath of abjuration, to return to their homes, and to live in safety. [ibid 2.13]

And yet, according to all probability, these were matters which ought to have been passed over in silence by men who wished to teach the readers of the Gospels to despise death for the sake of confessing Christianity (τῆς ὁμολογίας τοῦ χριστιανισμοῦ). [ibid 2.15]

Many also of our contemporaries, knowing well that if they made a confession of Christianity (ὡς ὁμολογήσαντες μὲν χριστιανισμὸν) they would be put to death, but that if they denied it they would be liberated, and their property restored, despised life, and voluntarily selected death for the sake of their religion. [ibid 2.17]

And as it is no ground of accusation against philosophy, that there exist Sophists, or Epicureans, or Peripatetics, or any others, whoever they may be, who hold false opinions; so neither is it against genuine Christianity (τοῦ ἀληθινοῦ χριστιανισμοῦ) that there are some who corrupt the Gospel histories, and who introduce heresies opposed to the meaning of the doctrine of Jesus. [ibid 2.27]

But if this result has not taken place, and if, on the contrary, they have suffered countless calamities rather than renounce Judaism (ἐξομόσωνται τὸν ἰουδαϊσμὸν) and their law, and have been cruelly treated, at one time in Assyria, at another in Persia, and at another under Antiochus, is it not in keeping with the probabilities of the case for those to suppose who do not yield their belief to their miraculous histories and prophecies, that the events in question could not be inventions, but that a certain divine Spirit being in the holy souls of the prophets, as of men who underwent any labour for the cause of virtue, did move them to prophesy some things relating to their contemporaries, and others to their posterity, but chiefly regarding a certain personage who was to come as a Saviour to the human race? [ibid 3.3]

In the next place, since he reproaches us with the existence of heresies in Christianity (τῶν ἐν χριστιανισμῷ αἱρέσεων) as being a ground of accusation against it, saying that when it had greatly increased in numbers, they were divided and split up into factions, each individual desiring to have his own party; and further, that being thus separated through their numbers, they confute one another, still having, so to speak, one name in common, if indeed they still retain it. And this is the only thing which they are yet ashamed to abandon, while other matters are determined in different ways by the various sects. [ibid 3.10]

So, then, seeing Christianity appeared an object of veneration to men (ἐπεὶ σεμνόν τι ἐφάνη τοῖς ἀνθρώποις χριστιανισμός) not to the more servile class alone, as Celsus supposes, but to many among the Greeks who were devoted to literary pursuits, there necessarily originated heresies—not at all, however, as the result of faction and strife, but through the earnest desire of many literary men to become acquainted with the doctrines of Christianity (τὰ χριστιανισμοῦ καὶ τῶν φιλολόγων πλείονας).[ibid]

Even Judaism itself afforded a pretext for the origination of heresies (Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἰουδαϊσμὸς πρόφασιν ἔσχε γενέσεως αἱρέσεων), in the different acceptation accorded to the writings of Moses and those of the prophets. [ibid 3.12]

For as that man is approved in medicine who, on account of his experience in various (medical) heresies, and his honest examination of the majority of them, has selected the preferable system—and as the great proficient in philosophy is he who, after acquainting himself experimentally with the various views, has given in his adhesion to the best,— so I would say that the wisest Christian was he who had carefully studied the heresies both of Judaism and Christianity (ταῖς ἰουδαϊσμοῦ καὶ χριστιανισμοῦ αἱρέσεσι). [ibid 3.13]

I maintain, moreover, that even after His incarnation, He is always found by those who possess the acutest spiritual vision to be most God-like, and to have really come down to us from God, and to have derived His origin or subsequent development not from human wisdom, but from the manifestation of God within Him, who by His manifold wisdom and miracles established Judaism first, and Christianity afterwards (τὸν ἰουδαϊσμὸν μετὰ δ' αὐτὸν τὸν χριστιανισμόν·); and the assertion that rebellion, and the advantages attending it, were the originating causes of a doctrine which has converted and improved so many men was effectually refuted. [ibid 3.14]

while with regard to the truths which are taught in our writings to those who have made progress in the study of Christianity (through that which is called by Paul the gift consisting in the word of wisdom through the Spirit, and in the word of knowledge according to the Spirit), Celsus does not seem even to have formed an idea, judging not only from what he has already said, but from what he subsequently adds in his attack upon the Christian system (τοῖς ἐν χριστιανισμῷ), when he asserts that Christians "repel every wise man from the doctrine of their faith, and invite only the ignorant and the vulgar; on which assertions we shall remark in due time, when we come to the proper place." (... Χριστιανῶν λέγει [Christians he says], "ὡς πάντα μὲν σοφὸν ἀπελαυνόντων τοῦ λόγου τῆς πίστεως αὐτῶν μόνους δὲ ἀνοήτους καὶ τοὺς ἀνδραποδώδεις καλούντων, περὶ ὧν κατὰ καιρὸν εἰσόμεθα, γενόμενοι κατὰ τὸν τόπον.") [ibid 3.18]

Now to this we reply, Good sir, (suppose that) you are right in eulogizing the fact that the Egyptians present to view many by no means contemptible mysteries, and obscure explanations about the animals (worshipped) among them, you nevertheless do not act consistently in accusing us as if you believed that we had nothing to state which was worthy of consideration, but that all our doctrines were contemptible and of no account, seeing we unfold the narratives concerning Jesus according to the 'wisdom of the word' to those who are 'perfect' in Christianity (ἐν χριστιανισμῷ τελείοις). Regarding whom, as being competent to understand the wisdom that is in Christianity (ἐν χριστιανισμῷ σοφίας), Paul says: 'We speak wisdom among them that are perfect; yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, who come to nought, but we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory; which none of the princes of this world knew.' [ibid 3.19]

But we, when we relate the events of the history of Jesus, have no ordinary defence to offer for their occurrence—this, viz., that God desired to commend the doctrine of Jesus as a doctrine which was to save mankind, and which was based, indeed, upon the apostles as foundations of the rising edifice of Christianity (τοῦ χριστιανισμοῦ ἐπιδιδόντα), but which increased in magnitude also in the succeeding ages, in which not a few cures are wrought in the name of Jesus, and certain other manifestations of no small moment have taken place. [ibid 3:28]

And those among us who are the ambassadors of Christianity (πρεσβεύοντες τὸν χριστιανισμὸν)sufficiently declare that they are debtors to Greeks and Barbarians, to wise men and fools, (for they do not deny their obligation to cure the souls even of foolish persons,) in order that as far as possible they may lay aside their ignorance, and endeavour to obtain greater prudence, by listening also to the words of Solomon: Oh, you fools, be of an understanding heart, and Who is the most simple among you, let him turn unto me [ibid 3:54]

no one who was really wise would reject what is said by a Christian acquainted with the principles of Christianity (τὰ ὑπὸ χριστιανοῦ ἐπιστήμονος τοῦ χριστιανισμοῦ λεγόμενα), or would be led into error, or ensnared by it.[ibid 3.72]

After this he again slanders the ambassador of Christianity (τῷ πρεσβεύοντι χριστιανισμὸν), and gives out regarding him that he relates ridiculous things, although he does not show or clearly point out what are the things which he calls ridiculous. [ibid 3.73]

But as he afterwards says that the teacher of Christianity (τὰ χριστιανισμοῦ διδάσκοντα) acts like a person who promises to restore patients to bodily health, but who prevents them from consulting skilled physicians, by whom his ignorance would be exposed.  [ibid 3.75]

In answer to which, it might be said that from the power which shows itself in those who are converted to Christianity (τῶν προσερχομένων χριστιανισμῷ), it is not at all the wicked who are won over to the Gospel, as the more simple class of persons, and, as many would term them, the unpolished. For such individuals, through fear of the punishments that are threatened, which arouses and exhorts them to refrain from those actions which are followed by punishments, strive to yield themselves up to the Christian religion (τῇ κατὰ χριστιανισμὸν θεοσεβείᾳ), being influenced by the power of the word to such a degree, that through fear of what are called in the word everlasting punishments, they despise all the tortures which are devised against them among men—even death itself, with countless other evils—which no wise man would say is the act of persons of wicked mind. [ibid 3.78]

Moreover, as for the most part it is not the wicked whom the ambassadors of Christianity (τὰ χριστιανισμοῦ πρεσβεύοντες) gain over, neither do we insult God. For we speak regarding Him both what is true, and what appears to be clear to the multitude, but not so clear to them as it is to those few who investigate the truths of the Gospel in a philosophical manner.[3.79]

Seeing, however, that Celsus alleges that Christians (Ἐπεὶ δὲ καὶ κούφαις ἐλπίσι φησὶν ὑπάγεσθαι τοὺς χριστιανίζοντας ὁ Κέλσος) are won over by us through vain hopes, we thus reply to him when he finds fault with our doctrine of the blessed life, and of communion with God [ibid 3.80]

For, arraying himself at the same time against both parties— against the Jews on the one hand, who deny that the advent of Christ has taken place, but who expect it as future, and against Christians on the other, who acknowledge that Jesus is the Christ spoken of in prophecy— he makes the following statement:

But that certain Christians and Jews should maintain (Ὅτι δὲ καὶ Χριστιανῶν τινες καὶ Ἰουδαῖοι), the former that there has already descended, the latter that there will descend, upon the earth a certain God, or Son of a God, who will make the inhabitants of the earth righteous, is a most shameless assertion, and one the refutation of which does not need many words.

Now here he appears to pronounce correctly regarding not certain of the Jews, but all of them, that they imagine that there is a certain (God) who will descend upon the earth; and with regard to Christians (περὶ δὲ Χριστιανῶν), that certain of them say that He has already come down. [ibid 4.1,2]

and by the coming of Christ He improves, through the doctrine of Christianity (τῷ κατὰ χριστιανισμὸν λόγῳ), not those who are unwilling, but those who have chosen the better life, and that which is pleasing to God.[ibid 4.3]

for he does not perceive that, while he wishes to turn away from Christianity (ὅτι χριστιανισμοῦ ἀποτρέψαι) those who read his treatise, he turns away also the sympathy of those who are not Christians from those who bear the heaviest burdens (of life). Whereas, had he been a philosopher, who was capable of perceiving the good which men may do each other, he ought, in addition to not removing along with Christianity the blessings (τῷ χριστιανισμῷ τὰ χρήσιμα) which are found among men, to have lent his aid to co-operate (if he had it in his power) with those principles of excellence which are common to Christianity (τοῖς κοινοῖς ἐν χριστιανισμῷ) and the rest of mankind. [ibid 4.83]

Celsus then continues: The Jews accordingly, and these - clearly meaning the Christians (Οὐκοῦν ὁ αὐτὸς θεὸς Ἰουδαίοις τε καὶ τοῖσδε, δῆλον δ' ὅτι τοῖς Χριστιανοῖς), have the same God; and as if advancing a proposition which would not be conceded, he proceeds to make the following assertion: It is certain, indeed, that the members of the great Church admit this (Σαφῶς γε τῶν ἀπὸ μεγάλης ἐκκλησίας τοῦτο ὁμολογούντων), and adopt as true the accounts regarding the creation of the world which are current among the Jews, viz., concerning the six days and the seventh [ibid 5:59]

After the above remarks he proceeds as follows: Let no one suppose that I am ignorant that some of them will concede that their God is the same as that of the Jews, while others will maintain that he is a different one, to whom the latter is in opposition, and that it was from the former that the Son came. Now, if he imagine that the existence of numerous heresies among the Christians is a ground of accusation against Christianity (Εἴπερ δὲ τὸ εἶναι αἱρέσεις πλείονας ἐν Χριστιανοῖς κατηγορίαν οἴεται χριστιανισμοῦ εἶναι), why, in a similar way, should it not be a ground of accusation against philosophy, that the various sects of philosophers differ from each other, not on small and indifferent points, but upon those of the highest importance? [ibid 5:61]

as Paul, too, distinctly says, who was a convert from Judaism to Christianity (ἀπὸ Ἰουδαίων προσελθόντα χριστιανισμῷ), I thank my God, whom I serve from my forefathers with a pure conscience. And let it be admitted also, that there is a third class who call certain persons carnal, and others spiritual,— I think he here means the followers of Valentinus (τοὺς ἀπὸ Οὐαλεντίνου) —yet what does this avail against us, who belong to the Church (τοὺς ἀπὸ τῆς ἐκκλησίας), and who make it an accusation against such as hold that certain natures are saved, and that others perish in consequence of their natural constitution? [ibid]

And let it be admitted further, that there are some who give themselves out as Gnostics (καὶ ἐπαγγελλόμενοι εἶναι Γνωστικοί), in the same way as those Epicureans (Ἐπικουρείοις) who call themselves philosophers: yet neither will they who annihilate the doctrine of providence be deemed true philosophers, nor those true Christians (Χριστιανοί) who introduce monstrous inventions, which are disapproved of by those who are the disciples of Jesus. [ibid]

Let it be admitted, moreover, that there are some who accept Jesus (τινες καὶ τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἀποδεχόμενοι), and who boast on that account of being Christians (ὡς παρὰ τοῦτο Χριστιανοὶ εἶναι αὐχοῦντες), and yet would regulate their lives, like the Jewish multitude (τὰ Ἰουδαίων πλήθη), in accordance with the Jewish law—and these are the twofold sect of Ebionites (Ἐβιωναῖοι), who either acknowledge with us that Jesus was born of a virgin, or deny this, and maintain that He was begotten like other human beings—what does that avail by way of charge against such as belong to the Church (ἀπὸ τῆς ἐκκλησίας), and whom Celsus has styled those of the multitude (ἀπὸ τοῦ πλήθους)? [ibid]

He adds, also, that certain of the Christians are believers in the Sibyl (Σιβυλλιστάς), having probably misunderstood some who blamed such as believed in the existence of a prophetic Sibyl, and termed those who held this belief Sibyllists (τὴν Σίβυλλαν καὶ Σιβυλλιστὰς).[ibid]

As we allege, however, that he has fallen into confusion in consequence of false notions which he has imbibed, come and let us point them out to the best of our ability, and show that although Celsus considers it Jewish (ἰουδαϊκὸν) to bow down to the heaven and the angels in it, such a practice is not at all Jewish (ἰουδαϊκὸν), but is in violation of Judaism (παραβατικὸν δὲ ἰουδαϊσμοῦ ἐστιν,), as it also is to do obeisance to sun, moon, and stars, as well as images. [ibid 5.8]

He next pours down upon us a heap of names, saying that he knows of the existence of certain Simonians who worship Helene, or Helenus, as their teacher, and are called Helenians (τινὰς καὶ Σιμωνιανούς, οἳ τὴν Ἑλένην ἤτοι διδάσκαλον Ἕλενον σέβοντες Ἑλενιανοὶ λέγονται). But it has escaped the notice of Celsus that the Simonians do not at all acknowledge Jesus to be the Son of God, but term Simon the power of God, regarding whom they relate certain marvellous stories, saying that he imagined that if he could become possessed of similar powers to those with which be believed Jesus to be endowed, he too would become as powerful among men as Jesus was among the multitude. [ibid 5.62]

Celsus knows, moreover, certain Marcellians, so called from Marcellina, and Harpocratians from Salome, and others who derive their name from Mariamme, and others again from Martha (καὶ Μαρκελλιανοὺς ἀπὸ Μαρκελλίνας καὶ Ἁρποκρατιανοὺς ἀπὸ Σαλώμης καὶ ἄλλους ἀπὸ Μαριάμμης καὶ ἄλλους ἀπὸ Μάρθας). We, however, who from a love of learning examine to the utmost of our ability not only the contents of Scripture, and the differences to which they give rise, but have also, from love to the truth, investigated as far as we could the opinions of philosophers, have never at any time met with these sects. He makes mention also of the Marcionites, whose leader was Marcion (καὶ Μαρκιωνιστῶν, προϊσταμένων Μαρκίωνα).[ibid]

In the next place, that he may have the appearance of knowing still more than he has yet mentioned, he says, agreeably to his usual custom, that there are others who have wickedly invented some being as their teacher and demon (Εἶθ' ἵνα δοκῇ καὶ ἄλλους εἰδέναι παρ' οὓς ὠνόμασε, φησὶν ἑαυτῷ συνήθως ὅτι ἄλλοι ἄλλον διδάσκαλόν τε καὶ δαίμονα), and who wallow about in a great darkness, more unholy and accursed than that of the companions of the Egyptian Antinous (κακῶς πλαζόμενοι καὶ καλινδούμενοι <εὕραντο προ στάτην> κατὰ σκότον πολὺν τῶν Ἀντίνου τοῦ κατ' Αἴγυπτον θιασωτῶν ἀνομώτερόν τε καὶ μιαρώτερον). And he seems to me, indeed, in touching on these matters, to say with a certain degree of truth, that there are certain others who have wickedly invented another demon, and who have found him to be their lord, as they wallow about in the great darkness of their ignorance. [ibid 5.63]

Moreover, we who know the maxim, Blessed are the peacemakers, and this also, Blessed are the meek, would not regard with hatred the corrupters of Christianity (τοὺς παραχαράττοντας τὰ χριστιανισμοῦ), nor term those who had fallen into error Circes and flattering deceivers. [ibid]

Celsus appears to me to have misunderstood the statement of the apostle, which declares that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their conscience seared with a hot iron; forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God has created to be received with thanksgiving of them who believe; and to have misunderstood also those who employed these declarations of the apostle against such as had corrupted the doctrines of Christianity (τῶν παραχαραξάντων τὰ χριστιανισμοῦ). And it is owing to this cause that Celsus has said that certain among the Christians are called 'cauterized in the ears' (ἀκοῆς καυστήριά τινας ὀνομάζεσθαι παρὰ Χριστιανοῖς) and also that some are termed enigmas, — a term which we have never met. The expression stumbling-block is, indeed, of frequent occurrence in these writings—an appellation which we are accustomed to apply to those who turn away simple persons, and those who are easily deceived, from sound doctrine. [ibid 5.64]

He appears to me, indeed, to have acted like those Jews who, when Christianity began to be first preached (τὴν ἀρχὴν τῆς τοῦ χριστιανισμοῦ διδασκαλίας), scattered abroad false reports of the Gospel, such as that Christians offered up an infant in sacrifice, and partook of its flesh; and again, that the professors of Christianity, wishing to do the 'works of darkness,' used to extinguish the lights (in their meetings), and each one to have sexual intercourse with any woman whom he chanced to meet. These calumnies have long exercised, although unreasonably, an influence over the minds of very many, leading those who are aliens to the Gospel to believe that Christians are men of such a character; and even at the present day they mislead some, and prevent them from entering even into the simple intercourse of conversation with those who are Christians. [ibid 6.27]

Now we, on the other hand, affirm, and have learned by experience, that they who worship the God of all things in conformity with the Christianity which comes by Jesus (κατὰ χριστιανισμὸν διὰ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ), and who live according to His Gospel, using night and day, continuously and becomingly, the prescribed prayers, are not carried away either by magic or demons. [ibid 6.41]

After this he returns to the subject of Marcion's opinions (τῆς γνώμης Μαρκίωνος) having already spoken frequently of them, and states some of them correctly, while others he has misunderstood; these, however, it is not necessary for us to answer or refute. Again, after this he brings forward the various arguments that may be urged on Marcion's behalf, and also against him, enumerating what the opinions are which exonerate him from the charges, and what expose him to them; and when he desires to support the statement which declares that Jesus has been the subject of prophecy—in order to found a charge against Marcion and his followers—he distinctly asks, How could he, who was punished in such a manner, be shown to be God's Son, unless these things had been predicted of him? He next proceeds to jest, and, as his custom is, to pour ridicule upon the subject, introducing two sons of God, one the son of the Creator, and the other the son of Marcion's God; and he portrays their single combats, saying that the Theomachies of the Fathers are like the battles between quails; or that the Fathers, becoming useless through age, and falling into their dotage do not meddle at all with one another, but leave their sons to fight it out. The remark which he made formerly we will turn against himself: What old woman would not be ashamed to lull a child to sleep with such stories as he has inserted in the work which he entitles A True Discourse? For when he ought seriously to apply himself to argument, he leaves serious argument aside, and betakes himself to jesting and buffoonery, imagining that he is writing mimes or scoffing verses; not observing that such a method of procedure defeats his purpose, which is to make us abandon Christianity (χριστιανισμὸν) and give in our adherence to his opinions, which, perhaps, had they been stated with some degree of gravity, would have appeared more likely to convince, whereas since he continues to ridicule, and scoff, and play the buffoon, we answer that it is because he has no argument of weight (for such he neither had, nor could understand) that he has betaken himself to such drivelling. [ibid 6.73]

But how can Celsus and the enemies of the divine Word, and those who have not examined the doctrines of Christianity (φιλαλήθως τὰ χριστιανισμοῦ) in the spirit of truth, know the meaning of the different appearances of Jesus? [ibid 6.77]

But if, on the other hand, he puts these words into the mouth of philosophers who search carefully into the meaning of Christian doctrines (τὸν χριστιανισμόν), the statements in question do not agree with their character and principles. [ibid 7:37]

And may God and His Only-begotten Son the Word be with us, to enable us effectively to refute the falsehoods which Celsus has published under the delusive title of A True Discourse, and at the same time to unfold the truths of Christianity (τὰ χριστιανισμοῦ ἀποδειχθῇ) with such fullness as our purpose requires. And as Paul said, We are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us, so would we in the same spirit and language earnestly desire to be ambassadors for Christ to men, even as the Word of God beseeches them to the love of Himself, seeking to win over to righteousness, truth, and the other virtues, those who, until they receive the doctrines of Jesus Christ, live in darkness about God and in ignorance of their Creator. [ibid 8.1]

But Jesus, wishing to lead all men by His teaching to the pure worship and service of God, and anxious not to throw any hindrance in the way of many who might be benefited by Christianity (ἀπὸ χριστιανισμοῦ), through the imposition of a burdensome code of rules in regard to food, has laid it down, that not that which goes into the mouth defiles a man, but that which comes out of the mouth; for whatsoever enters in at the mouth goes into the belly, and is cast out into the draught. [ibid 8:29]

But when the souls of those who die for the Christian faith depart (διὰ χριστιανισμὸν ἀποθνῃσκόντων) from the body with great glory, they destroy the power of the demons, and frustrate their designs against men. [ibid 8:44] And indeed, if we were to reason from what is probable as to the first formation of the Christian society, we should say that it is incredible that the apostles of Jesus Christ, who were unlettered men of humble life, could have been emboldened to preach Christian truth (τοῖς ἀνθρώποις χριστιανισμὸν) to men by anything else than the power which was conferred upon them, and the grace which accompanied their words and rendered them effective [ibid 8:47]

For we who have been persuaded by many, yea by innumerable, arguments to lead a Christian life (κατὰ χριστιανισμὸν βιοῦν), are especially anxious to bring all men as far as possible to receive the whole system of Christian truth; but when we meet with persons who are prejudiced by the calumnies thrown out against Christians, and who, from a notion that Christians are an impious people, will not listen to any who offer to instruct them in the principles of the divine word, then, on the common principles of humanity, we endeavour to the best of our ability to convince them of the doctrine of the punishment of the wicked, and to induce even those who are unwilling to become Christians to accept that truth.[ibid 8:52]

And we invite inquiry, not as though we wished to lead any to doubt regarding the truths of Christianity (κατὰ χριστιανισμὸν λόγου), but in order to show that it would be better for those who in every way revile the doctrines of Christianity, at any rate to suspend their judgment, and not so rashly to state about Jesus and His apostles such things as they do not know, and as they cannot prove, either by what the Stoics call apprehensive perception, or by any other methods used by different sects of philosophers as criteria of truth. [ibid 8:53]