Εὐσεβίου τοῦ Παμφίλου
πρὸς τὰ ὑπὸ Φιλοστράτου εἰς Ἀπολλώνιον διὰ τὴν Ἱεροκλεῖ παραλειφθεῖσαν αὐτοῦ τε καὶ τοῦ Χριστοῦ σύγκρισιν
1.1. Ἆρ᾿ οὖν, ὦ φιλότης, κἀκεῖνά σε τοῦ συγγραφέως ἄξιον ἀποθαυμάζειν, ἃ τῷ ἡμετέρῳ Σωτῆρί τε καὶ διδασκάλῳ τὸν Τυανέα συγκρίνων παρεδοξολόγει; πρὸς μὲν γὰρ τὰ λοιπὰ τῶν ἐν τῷ Φιλαλήθει, οὕτω γὰρ εὖ ἔχειν αὐτῷ τὸν καθ᾿ ἡμῶν ἐπιγράφειν ἐδόκει λόγον, οὐδὲν ἂν εἴη σπουδαῖον ἐπὶ τοῦ παρόντος ἵστασθαι μὴ αὐτοῦ ἴδια τυγχάνοντα, σφόδρα δὲ ἀναιδῶς ἐξ ἑτέρων οὐκ αὐτοῖς μόνον οὐχὶ νοήμασιν, ἀλλὰ καὶ ῥήμασι καὶ συλλαβαῖς ἀποσεσυλημένα. τύχοι μὲν ἂν καὶ αὐτὰ τῆς προσηκούσης κατὰ καιρὸν ἀπελέγξεως, δυνάμει δ᾿ ἤδη καὶ πρὸ τῆς ἰδίας κατ᾿ αὐτῶν γραφῆς ἀνατέτραπται καὶ προαπελήλεγκται ἐν ὅλοις ὀκτὼ συγγράμμασι τοῖς Ὠριγένει γραφεῖσι πρὸς τὸν ἀλαζονικώτερον τοῦ Φιλαλήθους ἐπιγεγραμμένον Κέλσου Ἀληθῆ Λόγον, ᾧ τὰς εὐθύνας ἀπαραλείπτως,
The Reply of Eusebius
Pupil of Pamphilus,1 to the work of Philostratus on Apollonius, concerning the comparison between him and Christ handed down by Hierocles.
1.1.Well, my dear friend,2 do you think that part too3 of the author’s work to be worthy of admiration:–his preposterous comparison of our savior and teacher with the man of Tyana? As for the other contents of The Lover of Truth (since that is how it pleased him to entitle his tract against us), it would not be worthwhile to take a stand for the moment. They are not in fact his own, but quite shamelessly plundered from other people, not just as to the ideas themselves, but right down to words and syllables. These parts too might receive the appropriate refutation in time, but in effect they have already been overturned and disproved in advance, even without a special work devoted to them. Origen wrote no less than eight books against The True Doctrine of Celsus (a title even more boastful than The Lover of Truth). The said writer submitted the work to an