Against Celsus 1.48

Even if the Jew will not defend Ezekiel and Isaiah when we compare the opening of the heavens for Jesus and the voice he heard with similar things recorded in Ezekiel and Isaiah or some other prophet, we at least will establish our case as best we can, saying this: just as it is believed that many have seen in a dream visions announcing some things more divine, and some things about the future of this life, either clearly or in riddles—and this is evident to all who accept providence—so what is absurd in supposing that what impresses the ruling faculty in a dream can impress it also when awake, for the benefit of the one in whom the impression is made or of those who will hear from him? And just as we have the impression in a dream of hearing, of the bodily hearing being struck, and of seeing with the eyes, though neither the eyes of the body nor the hearing is struck, but the ruling faculty experiences these things, so there is nothing absurd in such things having happened to the prophets, when they are recorded to have seen extraordinary things, or heard words of the Lord, or beheld the heavens opened. For I do not suppose that the visible heaven was opened, and its body split apart by the opening, for Ezekiel to record such a thing. Perhaps, then, one who hears the Gospels with understanding should take the same to be true of the Savior too, even if this offends the simpler folk, who in their great simplicity set the world in motion, splitting apart so vast and unified a body as the whole heaven. But one who examines the matter more deeply will say that there is, as Scripture has named it, a certain divine sense in general, which only the blessed man finds, according to what is said in Solomon: "that you will find a divine sense"; and that there are kinds of this sense: a sight naturally fitted to see things higher than bodies, among which the cherubim or seraphim are shown; a hearing that perceives voices that do not have their being in the air; a taste that feeds on the living bread which came down from heaven and gives life to the world; so too a smell that smells such things, in the sense in which Paul says there is "a fragrance of Christ to God"; and a touch, by which John says he has handled with his hands "concerning the word of life." The blessed prophets, having found the divine sense, and seeing divinely, hearing divinely, and likewise tasting and smelling, so to speak, with a sense not of the senses, and touching the Word with faith, so that an emanation from him came to them and healed them—in this way they saw what they record that they saw, and heard what they say they heard, and experienced similar things, as they recorded, eating the "roll" of a book given to them. So too Isaac "smelled the smell" of his son's more divine "garments," and added in a spiritual blessing: "See, the smell of my son is like the smell of a full field, which the Lord has blessed." Similarly to these, and in an intellectual rather than a bodily way, Jesus "touched" the leper to cleanse him—in two ways, I think: freeing him not only, as the many understand it, from bodily leprosy by bodily touch, but also from the other by his truly divine touch. In this way, then, "John bore witness, saying: I saw the Spirit descending like a dove from heaven, and it remained on him. And I did not know him; but he who sent me to baptize in water said to me: He on whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining, this is he who baptizes in the Holy Spirit. And I have seen and have borne witness that this is the Son of God." And for Jesus the heavens were opened; and at that time no one except John is recorded to have seen the heavens opened. But the Savior, foretelling to his disciples that this opening of the heavens would happen and that they would see it, says: "Truly, truly, I say to you, you will see heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man." And so Paul was caught up to the third heaven, having first seen it opened, since he was a disciple of Jesus. But to explain now why Paul says, "whether in the body I do not know, whether out of the body I do not know; God knows," is not for the present occasion. I will add to the argument also this: Celsus thinks that Jesus himself told of the opening of the heavens and of the Holy Spirit coming down on him in the form of a dove at the Jordan, though Scripture does not state that he himself said he had seen this. This most noble man did not perceive that it is not in keeping with one who said to his disciples about the vision on the mountain, "Tell the vision to no one until the Son of Man is raised from the dead," to have told his disciples what was seen and heard by John at the Jordan. One can see this also in the character of Jesus, who everywhere avoided talking about himself and for this reason said, "If I bear witness about myself, my witness is not true." And since he avoided talking about himself and wished to show that he was the Christ by his works rather than by words, the Jews said to him for this reason: "If you are the Christ, tell us plainly." But since it is a Jew in Celsus who says to Jesus about the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove, "Except that you say so, and bring forward one of those who were punished with you," we must show him that this too he did not attribute appropriately to the Jewish character. For the Jews do not connect John with Jesus, nor John's punishment with that of Jesus. In this too, then, the one who boasted that he knew everything is convicted of not knowing what words to attach to the Jew's speech to Jesus.