stephan huller

Probably, I just did a rapid Google search to support my own impressions about the Jewish text within the True Word. I might look at this again tonight but there is a natural break - both before and after the introduction of the text. Even if it is one day proved (I don't know how this would be 'proved' anyway) that Celsus made up the text it still has to be a text rather than a 'skit' or a poem (I don't know what you are imagining this 'Jew thing' being cited here). It's a text of some sort, artificial or otherwise - it has a beginning and an end and a definite order. There are differences between 'it' and the rest of the True Word.

DCHindley

Celsus could be making a parody of Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho, which features a philosophically inclined Christian who "tears to pieces" the beliefs of a Jew about Jesus and Jewish law and prophets.

DCH

stephan huller

Anything's possible. However would it be necessary to artificially manufacture a testimony to the Jewish hatred for things Christian? Surely the Toledoth Yeshu had precedents.

stephan huller

Philip Carrington dates the Jewish text in the True Word to 120 CE:

stephan huller

Origen also gives us an idea of the jumbled order in this little treatise (he consistently accuses Celsus of writing 'it') - it did not follow the order of the gospel of Matthew or any of the other gospels (Origen references non-canonical gospels):

stephan huller

Apparently there discussion of the Jew was developed in two parts - (a) the Jew accusing Jesus and then (b) the Jew addressing converts from Judaism to Christianity.

stephan huller

Another sign that the 'Jew' treatise was not written by Celsus:

Why would Celsus 'invent' a narrative which focuses on criticizing Jews for leaving to join Christianity when Celsus's main work is to argue that Jews and Christians did not know the True Word.

DCHindley

Stephan,

I was objecting to you asserting that Celsus said he was citing a document. From what Origen preserved of Celsus' True Word, I do not see that.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not arguing that Celsus didn't use sources. He seems to have secured samples of many Christian and Jewish writings ranging from Jewish (anti-Christian polemic), to Proto-Orthodox (apology & dialogue), to Marcionite (the nature of Jesus in relation to God), to Gnostic (Ophite diagram). However, he only seems to use them to create "sock puppet" caricatures of Christian & Jewish beliefs and teachings.

DCH

DCHindley

Yes, I was looking at this last night. For those who really care about this kind of thing, here is what Celsus' Jewish caracter has to say to Jewish converts to Christianity:

2:1 … he [i.e., the Jew of Celsus] has to say to the [Christian] converts from Judaism. He asserts that "they have forsaken the law of their fathers, in consequence of their minds being led captive by Jesus; that they have been most ridiculously deceived, and that they have become deserters to another name and to another mode of life."

… Celsus … represented the Jew holding such language as this to the converts from Judaism: "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?"

2:3 … Celsus, … makes this Jew of his address his fellow-citizen and the Israelitish converts in the following manner: "What induced you to abandon the law of your fathers?" etc.

… he says: "Certain among you have abandoned the usages of our fathers under a pretence of explanations and allegories; and some of you, although, as ye pretend, interpreting them in a spiritual manner, nevertheless do observe the customs of our fathers; and some of you, without any such interpretation, are willing to accept Jesus as the subject of prophecy, and to keep the law of Moses according to the customs of the fathers, as having in the words the whole mind of the Spirit."

… Celsus … in the subsequent parts of his work … makes mention of certain godless heresies altogether alien from the doctrine of Jesus, and even of others which leave the Creator out of account altogether,

2:4 The Jew, then, continues his address to converts from his own nation thus: "Yesterday and the day before, when we visited with punishment the man who deluded you, ye became apostates from the law of your fathers;"

… afterwards … he says: "How is it that you take the beginning of your system from our worship, and when you have made some progress you treat it with disrespect, although you have no other foundation to show for your doctrines than our law?"

… the objection of the Jew of Celsus, … "if anyone predicted to us that the Son of God was to visit mankind, he was one of our prophets, and the prophet of our God?"

2:5 After these matters, … repeating for the second time that "he was punished by the Jews for his crimes,"

… in the next place, … 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,

2:8 He says, further, that "many other persons would appear such as Jesus was, to those who were willing to be deceived."

He says, moreover, that this charge is brought against the Jews by the Christian converts, that they have not believed in Jesus as in God.

"How should we," he continues, "who have made known to all men that there is to come from God one who is to punish the wicked, treat him with disregard when he came?"

But the Jew of Celsus exclaims: "Why did we treat him, whom we announced beforehand, with dishonor? Was it that we might be chastised more than others?"

2:9 The Jew continues his discourse thus: "How should we deem him to be a God, who not only in other respects, as was currently reported, performed none of his promises, but who also, after we had convicted him, and condemned him as deserving of punishment, was found attempting to conceal himself, and endeavoring to escape in a most disgraceful manner, and who was betrayed by those whom he called disciples?

And yet," he continues, "he who was a God could neither flee nor be led away a prisoner; and least of all could he be deserted and delivered up by those who had been his associates, and had shared all things in common, and had had him for their teacher, who was deemed to be a Savior, and a son of the greatest God, and an angel."

But the Jew of Celsus exclaims: "Why did we treat him, whom we announced beforehand, with dishonor? Was it that we might be chastised more than others?"

2:9 The Jew continues his discourse thus: "How should we deem him to be a God, who not only in other respects, as was currently reported, performed none of his promises, but who also, after we had convicted him, and condemned him as deserving of punishment, was found attempting to conceal himself, and endeavoring to escape in a most disgraceful manner, and who was betrayed by those whom he called disciples?

And yet," he continues, "he who was a God could neither flee nor be led away a prisoner; and least of all could he be deserted and delivered up by those who had been his associates, and had shared all things in common, and had had him for their teacher, who was deemed to be a Savior, and a son of the greatest God, and an angel."

2:10 … Moreover, again, when the Jew says, "We both found him guilty, and condemned him as deserving of death,"

… that "Jesus attempted to make His escape by disgracefully concealing Himself?"

… he adds, "he was taken prisoner,"

2:11 In the next place, that He was betrayed by those whom He called His disciples, … calling the one Judas, however, "many disciples," ...

2:12 … assertions, viz., that "no good general and leader of great multitudes was ever betrayed; nor even a wicked captain of robbers and commander of very wicked men, who seemed to be of any use to his associates; but Jesus, having been betrayed by his subordinates, neither governed like a good general, nor, after deceiving his disciples, produced in the minds of the victims of his deceit that feeling of good-will which, so to speak, would be manifested towards a brigand chief."

2:13 This Jew of Celsus continues, after the above, in the following fashion: "Although he could state many things regarding the events of the life of Jesus which are true, and not like those which are recorded by the disciples, he willingly omits them."

And he charges the disciples with having invented the statement that Jesus foreknew and foretold all that happened to Him;

2:14 Celsus, … in the case of the miracles, … alleged that they were wrought by means of sorcery; ...

2:15 Celsus continues: "The disciples of Jesus, having no undoubted fact on which to rely, devised the fiction that he foreknew everything before it happened;"

2:16 … his assertion, that "the disciples of Jesus wrote such accounts regarding him, by way of extenuating the charges that told against him: as if," he says, "anyone were to say that a certain person was a just man, and yet were to show that he was guilty of injustice; or that he was pious, and yet had committed murder; or that he was immortal, and yet was dead; subjoining to all these statements the remark that he had foretold all these things."

… he … said: "For ye do not even allege this, that he seemed to wicked men to suffer this punishment, though not undergoing it in reality; but, on the contrary, ye acknowledge that he openly suffered."

2:17 … his remark, "What god, or spirit, or prudent man would not, on foreseeing that such events were to befall him, avoid them if he could; whereas he threw himself headlong into those things which he knew beforehand were to happen?"

2:18 After this the Jew makes another … remark, saying, "How is it that, if Jesus pointed out beforehand both the traitor and the perjurer, they did not fear him as a God, and cease, the one from his intended treason, and the other from his perjury?"

… the statement, "that these persons betrayed and denied him without manifesting any concern about him," …

2:19 … his objection, that "it is always the case when a man against whom a plot is formed, and who comes to the knowledge of it, makes known to the conspirators that he is acquainted with their design, that the latter are turned from their purpose, and keep upon their guard."

And then, … bringing his argument to a conclusion, he says: "Not because these things were predicted did they come to pass, for that is impossible; but since they have come to pass, their being predicted is shown to be a falsehood: for it is altogether impossible that those who heard beforehand of the discovery of their designs, should carry out their plans of betrayal and denial!"

… his conclusion … "that we are not to believe, because these things were predicted, that they have come to pass."

… he says, "It is altogether impossible for those who heard beforehand that their designs were discovered, to carry out their plans of betrayal and denial."

2:20 … he continues after this: "These events," he says, "he predicted as being a God, and the prediction must by all means come to pass. God, therefore, who above all others ought to do good to men, and especially to those of his own household, led on his own disciples and prophets, with whom he was in the habit of eating and drinking, to such a degree of wickedness, that they became impious and unholy men.

Now, of a truth, he who shared a man's table would not be guilty of conspiring against him; but after banqueting with God, he became a conspirator.

And, what is still more absurd, God himself plotted against the members of his own table, by converting them into traitors and villains!"

… makes … declaration …: "This shall infallibly happen, and it is impossible that it can be otherwise."

… the assertion of this learned Celsus, that "being a God He predicted these things, and the predictions must by all means come to pass."

2:21 … Celsus, … asserts "that he who was partaker of a man's table would not conspire against him; and if he would not conspire against a man, much less would he plot against a God after banqueting with him."

2:22 He adds to this, … the following: "And, which is still more absurd, God himself conspired against those who sat at his table, by converting them into traitors and impious men."

2:23 He continues in this strain: "If he had determined upon these things, and underwent chastisement in obedience to his Father, it is manifest that, being a God, and submitting voluntarily, those things that were done agreeably to his own decision were neither painful nor distressing."

2:24 After this, wishing to prove that the occurrences which befell Him were painful and distressing, and that it was impossible for Him, had He wished, to render them otherwise, he proceeds: "Why does he mourn, and lament, and pray to escape the fear of death, expressing himself in terms like these: 'O Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from Me?'" [Matt. xxvi. 39]

But if, as Celsus would allege, "nothing at that time was done to Jesus which was either painful or distressing,"

2:26 This Jew of Celsus … accuses the disciples of Jesus of having invented these statements, saying to them: "Even although guilty of falsehood, ye have not been able to give a colour of credibility to your inventions."

2:27 After this he says, that certain of the Christian believers, like persons who in a fit of drunkenness lay violent hands upon themselves, have corrupted the Gospel from its original integrity, to a threefold, and fourfold, and many-fold degree, and have remodelled it, so that they might be able to answer objections.

2:28 And since this Jew of Celsus makes it a subject of reproach that Christians should make use of the prophets, who predicted the events of Christ's life,

… he asserts that the "prophecies agree with ten thousand other things more credibly than with Jesus."

2:29 … the objection, … urged by a Jew, that "the prophets declare the coming one to be a mighty potentate, Lord of all nations and armies."

… Jew, … adds: "Nor did the prophets predict such a pestilence." [ὄλεθρον]

2:30 This objection also is cast in our teeth by Celsus: "From such signs and misinterpretations, and from proofs so mean, no one could prove him to be God, and the Son of God."

"For as the sun," he says, "which enlightens all other objects, first makes himself visible, so ought the Son of God to have done."

2:31 He next charges the Christians with being "guilty of sophistical reasoning, in saying that the Son of God is the Logos Himself."

And he thinks that he strengthens the accusation, because "when we declare the Logos to be the Son of God, we do not present to view a pure and holy Logos, but a most degraded man, who was punished by scourging and crucifixion."

Celsus … putting into the mouth of the Jew such a declaration as this: "If your Logos is the Son of God, we also give out assent to the same."

2:32 … now, … finding fault with our Lord's genealogy, ...

… Celsus, … asserts that the "framers of the genealogies, from a feeling of pride, made Jesus to be descended from the first man, and from the kings of the Jews."

… he adds, that "the carpenters wife could not have been ignorant of the fact, had she been of such illustrious descent."

2:33 "But," continues Celsus, "what great deeds did Jesus perform as being a God? Did he put his enemies to shame, or bring to a ridiculous conclusion what was designed against him?"

2:34 This Jew of Celsus, ridiculing Jesus, as he imagines, is described as being acquainted with the Bacchae of Euripides, in which Dionysus says: -- "The divinity himself will liberate me whenever I wish." [Euripides, Bacchae, 498]

"But," he continues, "no calamity happened even to him who condemned him, as there did to Pentheus, viz., madness or discerption."

… Celsus endeavors to cast reproach upon Him from the narratives in the Gospel, referring to those who mocked Jesus, and put on Him the purple robe, and the crown of thorns, and placed the reed in His hand.

2:35 … this objection, "If not before, yet why now, at least, does he not give some manifestation of his divinity, and free himself from this reproach, and take vengeance upon those who insult both him and his Father?"

2:36 Celsus next says: "What is the nature of the ichor in the body of the crucified Jesus? Is it 'such as flows in the bodies of the immortal gods?'" [Iliad, v. 340]

This turned out to be a little longer than the software can handle, so I will follow with the rest in a second post ...

DCHindley

Continuation of Celsus' lecture, via his Jewish character, to Jewish converts to Christianity:

2:37 After this, he who extracts from the Gospel narrative those statements on which he thinks he can found an accusation, makes the vinegar and the gall a subject of reproach to Jesus, saying that "he rushed with open mouth [χανδόν] to drink of them, and could not endure his thirst as any ordinary man frequently endures it."

2:38 The few next remarks: "You, O sincere believers, [ὦ πιστότατοι] find fault with us, because we do not recognize this individual as God, nor agree with you that he endured these (sufferings) for the benefit of mankind, in order that we also might despise punishment."

2:39 ... the following assertion of this Jew of Celsus ... that Jesus, "having gained over no one during his life, not even his own disciples, underwent these punishments and sufferings?"

2:41 In the person of the Jew, Celsus continues ... "he [Jesus] did not show himself to be pure from all evil."

2:42 ... Celsus will have it that "Jesus was not irreproachable,"

2:43 Celsus next addresses to us the following remark: "You will not, I suppose, say of him, that, after failing to gain over those who were in this world, he went to Hades to gain over those who were there."

2:44 Celsus in the next place says, …: "If, after inventing defences which are absurd, and by which ye were ridiculously deluded, ye imagine that you really make a good defense, what prevents you from regarding those other individuals who have been condemned, and have died a miserable death, as greater and more divine messengers of heaven (than Jesus)?"

... this Jew of Celsus compares Him to robbers, and says that "any similarly shameless fellow might be able to say regarding even a robber and murderer whom punishment had overtaken, that such an one was not a robber, but a god, because he predicted to his fellow-robbers that he would suffer such punishment as he actually did suffer,"

2:45 ... respecting the former disciples of Jesus, ... he says: "In the next place, those who were his associates while alive, and who listened to his voice, and enjoyed his instructions as their teacher, on seeing him subjected to punishment and death, neither died with him, nor for him, nor were even induced to regard punishment with contempt, but denied even that they were his disciples, whereas now ye die along with him."

2:46 … this Jew of Celsus … says that Jesus, "when on earth, gained over to himself only ten sailors and tax-gatherers of the most worthless character, and not even the whole of these?"

And now, … in reference to the matter before us following the order of his treatise as we have it, he says: "Is it not the height of absurdity to maintain, that if, while he himself was alive, he won over not a single person to his views, after his death any who wish are able to gain over such a multitude of individuals?"

2:47 ... he asks: "By what train of argument were you led to regard him as the Son of God?"

… he makes us answer that "we were won over to him, because … we know that his punishment was undergone to bring about the destruction of the father of evil."

And, … he asks: "What then? have not many others, too, been punished, and that not less disgracefully?"

2:48 Celsus … represents us as saying that "we deemed Jesus to be the Son of God, because he healed the lame and the blind." And he adds: "Moreover, as you assert, he raised the dead."

2:49 But Celsus, … 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 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."

2:51 Celsus, … made Jesus say, that it is "a certain Satan who contrives such devices;" … he asserts that "Jesus did not deny that these works have in them nothing of divinity, but proceed from wicked men," …

2:53 … this Jew of Celsus … says of Christ, "But, O light and truth! Jesus with his own voice expressly declares, as you yourselves have recorded, that there will appear among you others also, who will perform miracles like mine, but who are wicked men and sorcerers,"

Again, … he says, "And he terms him who devises such things, one Satan;"

… this Jew asserts regarding Jesus, that "even he himself does not deny that these works have in them nothing of divinity, but are the acts of wicked men;"

… this: "Being compelled by the force of truth, Moses at the same time both exposed the doings of others, and convicted himself of the same." … the Jew says, "Is it not a wretched inference from the same acts, to conclude that the one is a God, and the others sorcerers?"

… Celsus, … adduces this also: "Why from these works should the others be accounted wicked, rather than this man, seeing they have him as a witness against himself?" --

… he says: "He himself acknowledged that these were not the works of a divine nature, but were the inventions of certain deceivers, and of very wicked men."

2:54 After this, … the Jew of Celsus, … in his address to those of his countrymen who had become believers, says: "By what, then, were you induced (to become his followers)? Was it because he foretold that after his death he would rise again?"

2:55 The Jew continues his address to those of his countrymen who are converts, as follows: "Come now, let us grant to you that the prediction was actually uttered. Yet how many others are there who practise such juggling tricks, in order to deceive their simple hearers, and who make gain by their deception? -- as was the case, they say, with Zamolxis [Herodotus, History iv. 95] in Scythia, the slave of Pythagoras; and with Pythagoras himself in Italy; and with Rhampsinitus [Herodotus, History ii. 122] in Egypt (the latter of whom, they say, played at dice with Demeter in Hades, and returned to the upper world with a golden napkin which he had received from her as a gift); and also with Orpheus [Herodotus, History ii. 122] among the Odrysians, and Protesilaus in Thessaly, and Hercules [Diodorus, Bibl. Hist iv.] at Cape Taenarus, and Theseus.

But the question is, whether anyone who was really dead ever rose with a genuine body. [αὐτῷ σώματι]

Or do you imagine the statements of others not only to be myths, but to have the appearance of such, while you have discovered a becoming and credible termination to your drama in the voice from the cross, when he breathed his last, and in the earthquake and the darkness?

That while alive he was of no assistance to himself, but that when dead he rose again, and showed the marks of his punishment, and how his hands were pierced with nails: who beheld this?

A half-frantic [γυνη πάροιστρος] woman, as you state, and some other one, perhaps, of those who were engaged in the same system of delusion, who had either dreamed so, owing to a peculiar state of mind, [κατά τινα διάθεσιν ὀνειρώξας] or under the influence of a wandering imagination had formed to himself an appearance according to his own wishes, [ἢ κατά τὴν αὐτοῦ βούλησιν δόξῃ πεπλανημένῃ φαντασιωθείς] which has been the case with numberless individuals; or, which is most probable, one who desired to impress others with this portent, and by such a falsehood to furnish an occasion to impostors like himself."

2:56 … the Jew says that these histories of the alleged descent of heroes to Hades, and of their return thence, are juggling impositions, [τερατείας] maintaining that these heroes disappeared for a certain time, and secretly withdrew themselves from the sight of all men, and gave themselves out afterwards as having returned from Hades, --

2:57 … this Jew of Celsus … saying … it is impossible for anyone to rise from the dead with a genuine body, his language being: "But this is the question, whether anyone who was really dead ever rose again with a genuine body?"

2:58 … after these Greek stories which the Jew adduced respecting those who were guilty of juggling practices, [τερατευομένοις] and who pretended to have risen from the dead, he says to those Jews who are converts to Christianity: "Do you imagine the statements of others not only to be myths, but to have the appearance of such, while you have discovered a becoming and credible termination to your drama in the voice from the cross, when he breathed his last?"

2:59 … that both the earthquake and the darkness were an invention; [τερατείαν]

… he goes on to say, that "Jesus, while alive, was of no assistance to himself, but that he arose after death, and exhibited the marks of his punishment, and showed how his hands had been pierced by nails."

Speaking next of the statements in the Gospels, that after His resurrection He showed the marks of His punishment, and how His hands had been pierced, he asks, "Who beheld this?"

… he replies, "A half-frantic woman, as ye state."

… but others also are mentioned, this Jew of Celsus calumniates … adding, "And someone else of those engaged in the same system of deception!"

2:60 In the next place, … says, "That someone having so dreamed owing to a peculiar state of mind, or having, under the influence of a perverted imagination, formed such an appearance as he himself desired, reported that such had been seen; and this," he continues, "has been the case with numberless individuals."

2:61 Jesus … Celsus [says] … exhibited after His death only the appearance of wounds received on the cross, and was not in reality so wounded as He is described to have been;

2:63 After these points, Celsus proceeds … saying that "if Jesus desired to show that his power was really divine, he ought to have appeared to those who had ill-treated him, and to him who had condemned him, and to all men universally."

2:67 … the objection, that "if Jesus had really wished to manifest his divine power, he ought to have shown himself to those who ill-treated him, and to the judge who condemned him, and to all without reservation."

… Celsus … add, "For he had no longer occasion to fear any man after his death, being, as you say, a God; nor was he sent into the world at all for the purpose of being hid."

2:68 … this Jew of Celsus asserts that, "if this at least would have helped to manifest his divinity, he ought accordingly to have at once disappeared from the cross."

2:69 … according to the view of Celsus, … Jesus had immediately disappeared from the cross,

2:70 … this Jew of Celsus … say that Jesus concealed Himself … his words regarding Him are these: "And who that is sent as a messenger ever conceals himself when he ought to make known his message?"

… this objection, that "while he was in the body, and no one believed upon him, he preached to ail without intermission; but when he might have produced a powerful belief in himself after rising from the dead, he showed himself secretly only to one woman, and to his own boon companions." [τοῖς ἑαυτοῦ θιασώταις]

… Celsus … immediately subjoins: "While undergoing his punishment he was seen by all men, but after his resurrection by one, whereas the opposite ought to have happened."

2:71 … Celsus … has represented Him "as one who will lead the pious to the light, and who will have mercy on others, whether they sin or repent."

2:72 After the above statements, he continues: "If he wished to remain hid, why was there heard a voice from heaven proclaiming him to be the Son of God? And if he did not seek to remain concealed, why was he punished? or why did he die?"

2:73 The Jew proceeds, after this, to state … "His having wished, by the punishments which He underwent, to teach us also to despise death," that after His resurrection He should openly summon all men to the light, and instruct them in the object of His coming.

2:74 In addition to all this, the Jew further says: "All these statements are taken from your own books, in addition to which we need no other witness; for ye fall upon your own words." [αὐτοὶ γὰρ ἑαυτοῖς περιπίπτετε]

… the Jew adds, … this to his former remarks: "O most high and heavenly one! what God, on appearing to men, is received with incredulity?"

2:75 … this Jew of Celsus, … asks, "What God that appeared among men is received with incredulity, and that, too, when [461] appearing to those who expect him? or why, pray, is he not recognized by those who have been long looking for him?"

2:76 Celsus, in adopting the character of a Jew, … censures Jesus in such words as the following: "He makes use of threats, and reviles men on light grounds, when he says, 'Woe unto you,' and 'I tell you beforehand.' For by such expressions he manifestly acknowledges his inability to persuade; and this would not be the case with a God, or even a prudent man."

… Celsus, … representing the Jew as saying of Jesus, that "he makes use of threats and revilings on slight grounds, when he employs the expressions, 'Woe unto you,' and 'I tell you beforehand?'"

2:77 After this the Jew remarks, …: "We certainly hope that there will be a bodily resurrection, and that we shall enjoy an eternal life; and the example and archetype of this will be He who is sent to us, and who will show that nothing is impossible with God."

… he adds, "Where, then, is he, that we may see him and believe upon him?"

2:78 The Jew continues: "Did Jesus come into the world for this purpose, that we should not believe him?"

2:79 The conclusion of all these arguments regarding Jesus is thus stated by the Jew: "He was therefore a man, and of such a nature, as the truth itself proves, and reason demonstrates him to be."

So, there you go. I get the impression that he may have drawn from several sources, Jewish & Christian (including one or more NT Gospel), to produce this. Sometimes he seems to put into the mouth of his Jewish caracter statements that were attributed to specific parties of Jews, such as sadducees, in the Gospels, and acts like these are the generally accepted position of Jews everywhere. It gets complicated.

DCH