What do you think?
Rate this book
Αληθής Λόγος κατά Χριστιανών
Ο "Αληθής Λόγος", ένα έργο της ύστερης αρχαιότητας, έρχεται στο φως ύστερα από 18 αιώνες, μεταφέροντάς μας, «από πρώτο χέρι» την ιδεολογική αντίσταση των Ελλήνων ενάντια στον ιουδαιοχριστιανισμό. Στην Ελλάδα είτε από άγνοια είτε σκόπιμα, καλλιεργήθηκε η εσφαλμένη ιδέα ότι ο "Αληθής Λόγος" του Κέλσου έχει χαθεί για πάντα. Και αυτό ενώ ο "Αληθής Λόγος", το πρώτο γραπτό έργο υπεράσπισης του Ελληνισμού, ήδη έχει εκδοθεί στις περισσότερες χώρες της Ευρώπης και στις ΗΠΑ, μεταφρασμένος εδώ και πολλές δεκαετίες στα αγγλικά, γερμανικά και γαλλικά. Ο Κέλσος, εκλεκτικός φιλόσοφος της ύστερης αρχαιότητας, αντλώντας επιχειρήματα από το οπλοστάσιο της ελληνικής φιλοσοφίας και από την ιστορία, δίνει την ελληνική απάντηση σε δόγματα που τα θεωρεί προϊόντα βάρβαρης σκέψης.
Ο "Αληθής Λόγος", με το αδιάβλητο κύρος του αρχαιοελληνικού Λόγου, έρχεται να ανατρέψει τους μύθους περί «ελληνοχριστιανισμού», καταδεικνύοντας με έμφαση το χάσμα ανάμεσα στο Ελληνικό Πνεύμα και τον Χριστιανισμό...
Ο "Αληθής Λόγος", με το αδιάβλητο κύρος του αρχαιοελληνικού Λόγου, έρχεται να ανατρέψει τους μύθους περί «ελληνοχριστιανισμού», καταδεικνύοντας με έμφαση το χάσμα ανάμεσα στο Ελληνικό Πνεύμα και τον Χριστιανισμό...
176 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 177
24 people are currently reading
559 people want to read
About the author
Celsus
26 books15 followersCelsus (Greek: Κέλσος) was a 2nd-century Roman philosopher, writing in Greek, and an opponent of early Christianity. He is known for his literary work, The True Word (also Account, Doctrine or Discourse; Greek: Λόγος Ἀληθής), which survives exclusively in Origen's quotations from it in Contra Celsum. This work, c. 177 is the earliest known comprehensive attack on Christianity.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 27 of 27 reviews
April 6, 2025
Weak arguments, but that's less to the point than seeing the personal insights made from a pagan-outsider looking into a new religion at the time it was developing.
To throw Celsus a bone; perhaps he had better takes somewhere, but the ones recorded were the weaker, easier ones to dismiss.
Regardless, criticisms based on exoteric aspects only reveal the ignorance of the critic towards the things truly needful within a given tradition.
To throw Celsus a bone; perhaps he had better takes somewhere, but the ones recorded were the weaker, easier ones to dismiss.
Regardless, criticisms based on exoteric aspects only reveal the ignorance of the critic towards the things truly needful within a given tradition.
January 18, 2019
I’ve said it many times before after reading classical works that we arrogantly ignore the wisdom of our forebears to our own detriment. Celsus warned that Christianity could have disastrous effects for civic life-namely that Christians did not have the common good of all people in mind and that their reliance on superstition instead of reason would set mankind back.
Fast forward to 2019, nearly 1,900 years later and Celsus was right, almost terrifyingly so. I’m not an atheist nor am I anti-Christian. I’m pro-reason and pro-logic. Defying the highest abilities of man can only mean that we are subject to ignorance. After 2 years of Trump, and 3 years of Brexit- I think the Western world is learning a painful lesson it was already taught millennia ago.
Fast forward to 2019, nearly 1,900 years later and Celsus was right, almost terrifyingly so. I’m not an atheist nor am I anti-Christian. I’m pro-reason and pro-logic. Defying the highest abilities of man can only mean that we are subject to ignorance. After 2 years of Trump, and 3 years of Brexit- I think the Western world is learning a painful lesson it was already taught millennia ago.
November 27, 2012
A very good historical perspective that educates a million times more than any of the various mass market paperbacks by political atheists who are just trying to rabble rouse. This is a guy was born in B.C. times and had to study under a Jew to criticize Christianity and does it quite well.
January 15, 2015
Sadly this book, like countless others, is currently lost, but a decent amount of the text survived as quotes in Origen's Contra Celsum (Origen takes Celsus's points and refutes them). I originally wanted just read Origen's book but due to its length (5x this) and cost ($60), I decided to just start with this recreation of Celsus's original work.
This book was pretty interesting, the translation seems clear and he put the points together in a somewhat logical order. As for the book itself, I found it pretty interesting to see just what remains of what Celsus said about the Christians. I had a decent idea of what to expect from first reading Wilken's The Christians as the Romans Saw Them, but it was nice to read some of it for myself.
In this book Celsus tries to convince the reader that Christianity is a dumb religion and they're better off staying with the traditional Roman gods.
I don't have the book in front of me, but from what I remember:
He thinks that the creation account is stupid and Moses was stupid to have written it (day and night happens before sun and moon are created).
The flood was just a copy from other roman tales (I forget which one).
Mary was seduced and got pregnant by a roman soldier named Panthera, she made up the pregnancy by god to convince her Joseph to marry her.
He thinks that most of Jesus's best points were already said by Plato and Jesus just copies them.
He thinks most of the ideas of the Eucharist and the sacraments are just copies from the Mithra cult.
He really hates that Christians are exclusive in there beliefs, he feels that all people have worshiped the same supreme god, Romans, Greeks, Egyptians, although they call him by different names, where as Christians think they exclusively know him and he can't believe that Christians also raise a man Jesus to being equal to the supreme god (showing that back in 150AD Christians were already worshiping Jesus as god).
A decent part of this book is also spent refuting the gnostics which must have already been pretty prevalent by this time.
Overall this was a pretty interesting to get into the mind of a Roman pagan and see his thoughts on the early Christians, this book is also important because it caused some of the earliest apologetics to combat the claims made in this book (now I need to get Origen's refutations).
This book was pretty interesting, the translation seems clear and he put the points together in a somewhat logical order. As for the book itself, I found it pretty interesting to see just what remains of what Celsus said about the Christians. I had a decent idea of what to expect from first reading Wilken's The Christians as the Romans Saw Them, but it was nice to read some of it for myself.
In this book Celsus tries to convince the reader that Christianity is a dumb religion and they're better off staying with the traditional Roman gods.
I don't have the book in front of me, but from what I remember:
He thinks that the creation account is stupid and Moses was stupid to have written it (day and night happens before sun and moon are created).
The flood was just a copy from other roman tales (I forget which one).
Mary was seduced and got pregnant by a roman soldier named Panthera, she made up the pregnancy by god to convince her Joseph to marry her.
He thinks that most of Jesus's best points were already said by Plato and Jesus just copies them.
He thinks most of the ideas of the Eucharist and the sacraments are just copies from the Mithra cult.
He really hates that Christians are exclusive in there beliefs, he feels that all people have worshiped the same supreme god, Romans, Greeks, Egyptians, although they call him by different names, where as Christians think they exclusively know him and he can't believe that Christians also raise a man Jesus to being equal to the supreme god (showing that back in 150AD Christians were already worshiping Jesus as god).
A decent part of this book is also spent refuting the gnostics which must have already been pretty prevalent by this time.
Overall this was a pretty interesting to get into the mind of a Roman pagan and see his thoughts on the early Christians, this book is also important because it caused some of the earliest apologetics to combat the claims made in this book (now I need to get Origen's refutations).
November 20, 2015
Celsus' wit is fantastic. If you are interested in learning about the ways in which Christianity borrowed from pagan culture, this is must read. Celsus raises a whole assortment of points that seem to have not been readily answerable by Christians in the second century. For a book written by a philosopher it is very easy to read and not very long. At times Celsus can go overboard in his name calling of Christians,, but it does show that early Christianity mostly catered to lower classes that were not very literate. I think the most humerus part is when Celsus calls bodily resurrection at judgement day the stuff of worms.
April 3, 2024
Fun and highly readable critique of Christianity. Written in the second century, it raises many questions that are still relevant today. Celsus attacks the new religion on several fronts, critiquing philosophical, theological, and historical inconsistencies, as well as the moral failings of believers and its negative social effects. Although some sources describe him as an Epicurean, his arguments in the book are quite eclectic, with frequent references to Plato.
Celsus portrays Jesus as a charlatan sorcerer who was so unconvincing in his divine mission that even his closest followers were willing to betray him. He analyzes numerous sketchy parts of his biography and compares them with other prophets and religions. Without solid foundation Christianity divided into numerous sects and Celsus also notes how they viciously slandered and abused each other. He observes that the new movement usually attracted gullible, uneducated people who shamelessly flaunted their ignorance and supposed humility, while also plagiarizing Greek philosophers to mask the intellectual flaws in their worldview. Additionally, this new religion was very attractive to sinners and criminals, while rarely able to interest anyone truly virtuous and good. Celsus explains that Christians lowered the moral standards by claiming that everyone is in fact a sinner, no matter how righteous he lives, and that their god even prefers people who commit sins and then melodramatically repent.
Celsus is generally unimpressed by the Judeo-Christian god, viewing him as rather incompetent and questioning why would he choose an irrelevant provincial tribe for divine revelation. He sees him as too anthropocentric, and is puzzled by the story that he was incarnated, lead an incredibly mediocre life and then died dishonorably. He contrasts the death of Jesus with ancient examples of heroic and stoic deaths. He also finds it confusing that the god of Moses orders murderous ethnic cleansing, promising wealth and power to his faithful, only to send a son who suddenly advocates the opposite. Not very fond of the Jewish tradition, Celsus does not mince words, noting that Moses wrote his story of the origin of the world "because he was stupid" and describing the books that he and other prophets put together as "absolute garbage". In addition to his dissatisfaction with the Judeo-Christian god, Celsus also seems particularly disgusted by the idea of the resurrection of the body, seeing both of them as decline from more sophisticated pagan ideas of abstract, hardly-describable Creator God and immortality of the soul.
Celsus was a conservative defender of Roman values; however, in a twist of fate his books were later banned by imperial orders as an easy way to counter his critique. It is estimated that surviving fragments constitute around 70 percent of the original work, and even in this form the book is actually well-organized and very readable. He is sometimes compared to Nietzsche, not only because of his acerbic wit, but also because he depicts Christianity as a religion for disreputable low-class people who use moralistic rhetoric to cover their vulgar instincts and vicious motives. Nietzsche never mentions Celsus, but his friend Franz Overbeck studied him, and there is also a chapter on Celsus in Renan’s book about Marcus Aurelius which Nietzsche read. Similar to the early Christians criticized by Celsus, Nietzsche was also known for freely borrowing useful ideas from others without providing proper references. Overall, this book offers intriguing insights into the perspective that educated pagans had on Christianity. Furthermore, it remains relevant as many questions and arguments raised by Celsus were later echoed by deist and atheist philosophers.
Celsus portrays Jesus as a charlatan sorcerer who was so unconvincing in his divine mission that even his closest followers were willing to betray him. He analyzes numerous sketchy parts of his biography and compares them with other prophets and religions. Without solid foundation Christianity divided into numerous sects and Celsus also notes how they viciously slandered and abused each other. He observes that the new movement usually attracted gullible, uneducated people who shamelessly flaunted their ignorance and supposed humility, while also plagiarizing Greek philosophers to mask the intellectual flaws in their worldview. Additionally, this new religion was very attractive to sinners and criminals, while rarely able to interest anyone truly virtuous and good. Celsus explains that Christians lowered the moral standards by claiming that everyone is in fact a sinner, no matter how righteous he lives, and that their god even prefers people who commit sins and then melodramatically repent.
Celsus is generally unimpressed by the Judeo-Christian god, viewing him as rather incompetent and questioning why would he choose an irrelevant provincial tribe for divine revelation. He sees him as too anthropocentric, and is puzzled by the story that he was incarnated, lead an incredibly mediocre life and then died dishonorably. He contrasts the death of Jesus with ancient examples of heroic and stoic deaths. He also finds it confusing that the god of Moses orders murderous ethnic cleansing, promising wealth and power to his faithful, only to send a son who suddenly advocates the opposite. Not very fond of the Jewish tradition, Celsus does not mince words, noting that Moses wrote his story of the origin of the world "because he was stupid" and describing the books that he and other prophets put together as "absolute garbage". In addition to his dissatisfaction with the Judeo-Christian god, Celsus also seems particularly disgusted by the idea of the resurrection of the body, seeing both of them as decline from more sophisticated pagan ideas of abstract, hardly-describable Creator God and immortality of the soul.
Celsus was a conservative defender of Roman values; however, in a twist of fate his books were later banned by imperial orders as an easy way to counter his critique. It is estimated that surviving fragments constitute around 70 percent of the original work, and even in this form the book is actually well-organized and very readable. He is sometimes compared to Nietzsche, not only because of his acerbic wit, but also because he depicts Christianity as a religion for disreputable low-class people who use moralistic rhetoric to cover their vulgar instincts and vicious motives. Nietzsche never mentions Celsus, but his friend Franz Overbeck studied him, and there is also a chapter on Celsus in Renan’s book about Marcus Aurelius which Nietzsche read. Similar to the early Christians criticized by Celsus, Nietzsche was also known for freely borrowing useful ideas from others without providing proper references. Overall, this book offers intriguing insights into the perspective that educated pagans had on Christianity. Furthermore, it remains relevant as many questions and arguments raised by Celsus were later echoed by deist and atheist philosophers.
Read
February 24, 2023Dos cosas, entre otras, me han resaltado especialmente del ataque al cristianismo primitivo que hace un contemporáneo suyo, Celso:
1) que muchas de las críticas que se hacen actualmente al cristianismo ya se encuentran en su escrito (y también sus respectivas respuestas en los apologistas cristianos de ese tiempo) y
2) el gran choque que suponía para la mentalidad de entonces la creencia cristiana en un Dios que se humilla en su humanidad, un "Dios crucificado", y que, a su vez, recibe y se revela a las gentes más humildes, marginadas y viles de la sociedad, lo cual se consideraba ridículo, una locura; locura, por otra parte, sobre la que ya escribe Pablo con respecto a los griegos en su carta a los Corintios (1 Cor. 1,18-30).
1) que muchas de las críticas que se hacen actualmente al cristianismo ya se encuentran en su escrito (y también sus respectivas respuestas en los apologistas cristianos de ese tiempo) y
2) el gran choque que suponía para la mentalidad de entonces la creencia cristiana en un Dios que se humilla en su humanidad, un "Dios crucificado", y que, a su vez, recibe y se revela a las gentes más humildes, marginadas y viles de la sociedad, lo cual se consideraba ridículo, una locura; locura, por otra parte, sobre la que ya escribe Pablo con respecto a los griegos en su carta a los Corintios (1 Cor. 1,18-30).
July 28, 2025
Un libro breve y muy completo. Un interesante vistazo sobre cómo las gentes cultas del mundo grecorromano vieron aquel cristianismo primitivo y qué críticas presentaron ante el mismo. Una gran defensa de la religión, filosofía y valores del antiguo Mediterráneo frente a la alternativa presentada por los cultos abrahámicos. Y a nivel más micro, me encanta las citas de Celso a otros filósofos anteriores a él, especialmente de Platón. Te muestra que Celso era un hombre verdaderamente leído y es un ejemplo muy sólido de la filosofía platónica más allá del propio Platón. Sorprende la lucidez con la que está escrito, dado que muchas de las advertencias que Celso escribió ya en el siglo II d.C. acerca de las consecuencias del cristianismo y su contribución a la caída del Imperio Romano terminarían por ocurrir progresivamente hasta el inevitable final en el siglo V.
Read
October 19, 2024Crazy how anti-Christian apologetics haven’t really changed.
November 27, 2023
Hoffmann's translation is not at all respecting of the Greek text. He often reinterprets the meaning of words according to whatever will make Celsus seem wiser. He translates the word "dogma" as "truth" sometimes, as "eccentric belief" other times. The only criteria is that which serves Hoffmann best. He also has been accused of completely changing certain parts of the text, attributing Origen's words to Celsus, omitting some of Celsus' criticisms, etc... Trigg 1988, a Review of Hoffmann's translation, explores at length all the ways through which Hoffmann changed Celsus.
October 19, 2020
Απολαυστικό.
February 26, 2021
Libro che mi ha lasciato perplesso su almeno due fronti.
1) Il "discorso vero" di Celso non è giunto fino a noi in modo autonomo, ma soltanto contenuto all'interno dell'opera apologetica "Contro Celso" di Origene, cioè un libro di qualche secolo successivo dove l'opera viene continuamente citata per essere smentita. Ora, non nego che dall'opera di Origene si possa intuire quello che diceva l'opera di Celso, ma ritengo confusionario estrapolare le suddette frasi e pubblicare un libro attribuendolo a Celso. Non abbiamo idea di quanto sia la parte mancante. Scritto così, il libro pare una raccolta di pensieri slegata tra di loro che restituisce, credo, un'idea diversa di ciò che era l'opera di Celso.
2) Passiamo al contenuto vero e proprio di Celso. Mi ha deluso. A mio modesto parere Celso (intellettuale dell'epoca di Marco Aurelio che vuole confutare/attaccare la dottrina cristiana) ha dimostrato di capirci molto molto poco del cristianesimo. Celso individua chi sono i cristiani, cosa fanno e cosa pensano, ma non capisce che è proprio ciò che lui disprezza profondamente a costituire la forza dei cristiani dell'epoca. Il tempo di Celso (fine II secolo d.C.) è quello in cui i Cristiani riescono a parlare ai poveri, schiavi e donne (gli emarginati della società romana) ma anche a nobili, ricchi, banchieri (le vicende di Carpofore e papa Vittore, Marcia amante di Commodo ecc).
I continui attacchi alla figura di Gesù ne sono l'esempio. Per Celso è inconcepibile che la divinità possa essersi incarnata nella figura "piccola, sgraziata e povera" come descrive egli Gesù.
Anche non aver compreso il concetto di risurrezione, che egli vede come semplice rianimazione della carne.
La faziosità di Celso è dimostrata dal fatto che non ci sono cenni ai ricchi e nobili che si convertivano (nonostante gli esempi che ho detto sopra), come se volesse escludere un fatto che temeva molto. Finché sono poveri e ignoranti a convertirsi, la cosa è persino "normale", ben diverso se iniziano a farlo persone dotate di cultura e ricchezze.
Ci sono comunque delle cose interessanti. La discussione sui demoni, l'elenco di figura pagane che compirono miracoli, certe esposizioni di dottrine neo/medioplatoniche, il riconoscimento delle sapienze non-greche (egiziani, persiani, celti ecc), gli accenni ai vangeli non canonici (per Celso i discepoli erano dieci e non dodici, fatto interessante), alle diverse eresie e sette (gnostiche ecc ecc ecc). Storicamente, accenni molto interessanti.
Mi sento di consigliare il libro se si ha un buon retroterra sulla storia imperiale e sulla storia del cristianesimo, altrimenti si rischia di capirci poco, soprattutto come contesto dell'epoca.
1) Il "discorso vero" di Celso non è giunto fino a noi in modo autonomo, ma soltanto contenuto all'interno dell'opera apologetica "Contro Celso" di Origene, cioè un libro di qualche secolo successivo dove l'opera viene continuamente citata per essere smentita. Ora, non nego che dall'opera di Origene si possa intuire quello che diceva l'opera di Celso, ma ritengo confusionario estrapolare le suddette frasi e pubblicare un libro attribuendolo a Celso. Non abbiamo idea di quanto sia la parte mancante. Scritto così, il libro pare una raccolta di pensieri slegata tra di loro che restituisce, credo, un'idea diversa di ciò che era l'opera di Celso.
2) Passiamo al contenuto vero e proprio di Celso. Mi ha deluso. A mio modesto parere Celso (intellettuale dell'epoca di Marco Aurelio che vuole confutare/attaccare la dottrina cristiana) ha dimostrato di capirci molto molto poco del cristianesimo. Celso individua chi sono i cristiani, cosa fanno e cosa pensano, ma non capisce che è proprio ciò che lui disprezza profondamente a costituire la forza dei cristiani dell'epoca. Il tempo di Celso (fine II secolo d.C.) è quello in cui i Cristiani riescono a parlare ai poveri, schiavi e donne (gli emarginati della società romana) ma anche a nobili, ricchi, banchieri (le vicende di Carpofore e papa Vittore, Marcia amante di Commodo ecc).
I continui attacchi alla figura di Gesù ne sono l'esempio. Per Celso è inconcepibile che la divinità possa essersi incarnata nella figura "piccola, sgraziata e povera" come descrive egli Gesù.
Anche non aver compreso il concetto di risurrezione, che egli vede come semplice rianimazione della carne.
La faziosità di Celso è dimostrata dal fatto che non ci sono cenni ai ricchi e nobili che si convertivano (nonostante gli esempi che ho detto sopra), come se volesse escludere un fatto che temeva molto. Finché sono poveri e ignoranti a convertirsi, la cosa è persino "normale", ben diverso se iniziano a farlo persone dotate di cultura e ricchezze.
Ci sono comunque delle cose interessanti. La discussione sui demoni, l'elenco di figura pagane che compirono miracoli, certe esposizioni di dottrine neo/medioplatoniche, il riconoscimento delle sapienze non-greche (egiziani, persiani, celti ecc), gli accenni ai vangeli non canonici (per Celso i discepoli erano dieci e non dodici, fatto interessante), alle diverse eresie e sette (gnostiche ecc ecc ecc). Storicamente, accenni molto interessanti.
Mi sento di consigliare il libro se si ha un buon retroterra sulla storia imperiale e sulla storia del cristianesimo, altrimenti si rischia di capirci poco, soprattutto come contesto dell'epoca.
November 7, 2021
Leggere Celso è stata un'esperienza unica e molto strana inizialmente. Spesso davanti alle sue confutazioni mi sono ritrovata a rispondergli nella mia testa con le tesi cristiane, anche se non sono credente, e poi mi fermavo, analizzavo quello che avevo letto e mi rendevo conto che aveva perfettamente senso.
Mi piace molto studiare le religioni; non sono credente ma frequento ambiti cattolici, ho fatto catechismo per molti anni e molti miei cari amici sono cattolici praticanti.
So come un cattolico pensa, anche se non condivido quello in cui crede, e vedere la parte opposta è stato incredibilmente stimolante. Oltre ad essere interessante avere il punto di vista pagano (visto che studiamo la Storia dal punto di vista del Cristianesimo), è interessante come attraverso le critiche di Celso per riflesso si capisce moltissimo della religione romana. Mi aspettavo solo sapere di più del rapporto pagani-romani, invece ho imparato anche cosa pensava un pagano della natura degli dei e del mondo; mi ha stimolata ad indagare ancora.
Mi piace molto studiare le religioni; non sono credente ma frequento ambiti cattolici, ho fatto catechismo per molti anni e molti miei cari amici sono cattolici praticanti.
So come un cattolico pensa, anche se non condivido quello in cui crede, e vedere la parte opposta è stato incredibilmente stimolante. Oltre ad essere interessante avere il punto di vista pagano (visto che studiamo la Storia dal punto di vista del Cristianesimo), è interessante come attraverso le critiche di Celso per riflesso si capisce moltissimo della religione romana. Mi aspettavo solo sapere di più del rapporto pagani-romani, invece ho imparato anche cosa pensava un pagano della natura degli dei e del mondo; mi ha stimolata ad indagare ancora.
January 14, 2023
"Αληθής λόγος κατά χριστιανών" ο πλήρης τίτλος. Μια προσπάθεια κριτικής του χριστιανισμού από έναν Έλληνα φιλόσοφο. Έχει πολλές ενδιαφέρουσες απόψεις, αλλά, δυστυχώς, το έργο έχει σωθεί μέσα από την κριτική που του ασκεί ο χριστιανός συγγραφέας Ωριγένης και όχι αυτούσιο, ώστε να βλέπει κάποιος με σαφήνεια και πληρότητα όλα τα επιχειρήματα του. Έτσι, φιλτραρισμένα μέσα από την κριτική του χριστιανισμού φαίνονται πιο αδύναμα και δεν πείθουν ιδιαίτερα. Ωστόσο, είναι σημαντικό να διαβάζουμε και τέτοια κείμενα ώστε να βλεπουμε και τον αντίλογο. Ανάλογα είναι τα έργα του Πορφυρίου, του Ιουλιανού και του Λιβάνιου. Αξίζει να τα διαβάσετε.
May 14, 2020
Celsus was a harsh critic of Jesus and Christianity. He was a Greek philosopher and tried to use argument in the logical sense to show the Christians how depraved and faulty their thinking was. I would have liked to read a book on his work that felt more organized. There are very few paragraph breaks in this book and many run-on sentences. It felt like running a marathon only your trying to read it. While I appreciate the efforts that went into trying to give the reader a sense of who Celsus was it lacked structure.
July 18, 2022
This books was really hilarious and a fun way to look at early arguments against Christianity. Not something I would recommend if you are in anyway serious about this topic, but definitely a fun window into early thought processes against this ‘new’ religion.
Few things; it comes off as antisemitic (so watch out for that), it’s misogynistic (of course it is), and it obviously pro-empire rule (so there is a lot of leaps in logic that are just baffling and insulting)
Few things; it comes off as antisemitic (so watch out for that), it’s misogynistic (of course it is), and it obviously pro-empire rule (so there is a lot of leaps in logic that are just baffling and insulting)
September 11, 2023
I've came full circle
November 23, 2023
Me quedo con que los reyes magos son caldeos...jajajaja
February 12, 2024
el cristianismo antes de Agustín de Hipona era huesos
April 11, 2016
We don't have a complete version of Celsus's book unfortunately. It's been lost in the midst of time (as well as book burning). What we have is about 70 percent of it, reconstructed from the quotations in Origen's book Against Celsus. The True Doctrine is a sharp, irreverent and devastating Criticism of Christianity, probably the most famous in antiquity. Hoffmann has done a fine job not only putting this book together, but also giving us a lengthy introduction and copious notes. He also gives us a translation that incorporates today's idioms. Reading it I found it to be a mixed bag. Some of his insights are spot on, almost modern in there perception. Other times he seemed a tad confusing and inconsistent. Finally, there were some portions where I felt he did not understand Christianity as much as he thought. I did not read Origen's response, but I can anticipate his answers to Celsus's criticisms.
Christians might not like his constant backhanded nastiness, maybe even more than his arguments. I found them juicy!
Christians might not like his constant backhanded nastiness, maybe even more than his arguments. I found them juicy!
April 1, 2013
I enjoyed reading this and would encourage the reading of it for a better understanding of Christianity and its relationship with the Roman world of antiquity. Celsus ends up providing lots of corroborating evidence for Christianity, useful to us today. We also gain greater insights into the philosophical differences between Christians and non-Christians.
Celsus mounts his attack against Christianity, but none of his arguments were able to stop the truth of Christianity from spreading across the Empire. He is sincere, but it is obvious from reading this work that he is grasping at straws. We can discern whose arguments are stronger easily: Celsus' "On the True Doctrine" is outdated, little known and only interesting for history buffs; the Bible is the best selling book of all time, is read by billions today, and is just as vibrant and relevant as it has ever been.
Celsus mounts his attack against Christianity, but none of his arguments were able to stop the truth of Christianity from spreading across the Empire. He is sincere, but it is obvious from reading this work that he is grasping at straws. We can discern whose arguments are stronger easily: Celsus' "On the True Doctrine" is outdated, little known and only interesting for history buffs; the Bible is the best selling book of all time, is read by billions today, and is just as vibrant and relevant as it has ever been.
November 22, 2009
In the 2nd century CE a Roman author named Celsus wrote a book attacking the Christian movement, but when Christianity became the official religion of Rome Celsus' book was thoroughly suppressed, so no copies survived into modern times. Celsus was quoted extensively though by early Church Fathers who wrote books in response to his writings. This book is an attempt to reassemble Celsus' book based on the surviving quotations. It is impossible to know if Celsus' best arguments are represented here, or if his opponents only quoted his weaker arguments in order to more easily dismiss him, but either way it is still an interesting read.
January 5, 2009
This book was written by a Greek philosopher named Celsus in 178 AD and is a scathing critique of the then upstart cult of Jesus. I read it because I was interested in comparing early anti-christian literature to anti-Mormon literture. The similarities are striking.
November 2, 2018
Libro muy bien documentado sobre los sucesos ocurridos en los tiempos de Jesucristo . LA información, definitivamente nos sirve para realizar el verdadero discurso contra los cristianos y tener una visión mas real de la historia
July 1, 2015
Read in Russian.
April 12, 2022
What can I say, Celsus was funny.
May 12, 2019
Occasionally pretty funny
Displaying 1 - 27 of 27 reviews