Library › Eusebius of Caesarea › On the Theophania
On the Theophania
Eusebius of Caesarea, tr. Lee, 1843
He however (i. e. Plato) determined, as by divine revelation, what that is “which exists …
He however (i. e. Plato) determined, as by divine revelation, what that is “which exists in all time, but which could not be (of itself);” and what that is “which is apprehended by knowledge together with reason, and (is) in all time according to itself.” He also said, in what way it exists; stating openly, well, and wisely, (and) in plain terms, the true account of the Deity, as (its) nature is, in these words: “God therefore, according to our former discourse, holds the beginning, middle, and end, of this all which exists: and, proceeding according to nature, He rightly disposes (it). And to Him does justice ever adhere, awarding punishment to those who swerve from the Divine Law.” But, How came he to swerve from the Divine Law, and to think defectively of the justice which is over all? and to put forth for us, these laws of mortal men? this Philosopher too,—this (I say), who could send the soul above the curvature of the heavens,—to fear Death? Besides, I cannot think that this same man held soundly of the immortality of the soul, because he made the notion of the vulgar his own. For, it was not (according to this) that the souls of men only were immortal; but also, (those) of dogs, hedgehogs, ants, horses, asses, and of the rest of the irrational animals; and, that (these) differed in nothing, as to their essence, from the souls of the Philosophers! He (also) affirmed after the Egyptian manner, that these same effected a change into every sort of body; those of men being transfusable into the beastly nature. On these accounts, he is as worthy of reprobation in this case, as in that in which he gave his approval, but lied on the other side! And, although this was (such) an astonishing man, that he could apprehend the Maker and Creator of this whole; nevertheless, as he put not forth the word of righteousness, he is particularly deserving of the reprehension of every man: because “he knew God, but honoured Him not as God; but worshipped and served the creature, exclusive of the Creator.” He also named those Gods, and worshipped them (as such), which were (supposed to be) fixed in visible bodies; the Sun, the Moon, and the Stars, confessing at once, and at the same time, that they were made, were perishable, and compounded in their nature of fire, earth, and at the same time, of the rest of the elements! And these same he worshipped, he honoured, and called them Gods! And then again, he afterwards confessed that these very same (Deities) were both dissoluble, and subject to corruption! But we may hear him,—as the thing said is at hand,—saying in the Timæus:—