# Against Hierocles - Author: [Eusebius of Caesarea](https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/authors/eusebius-of-caesarea/) - Latin title: *Contra Hieroclem* - Date: ca. 303-312 (approximate) - Source: C. L. Kayser, ed., Flavii Philostrati opera, vol. 1 (Leipzig: Teubner, 1870), 369-413 - Translation: Claude, from the original text, unless a passage says otherwise; each passage below gives the translator - Editions and translations: J.-P. Migne, ed., Patrologia Graeca 22 (Paris, 1857), cols. 795-868 - Work page: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/ - Passages: 45 ## Kayser p. 369 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/369/#p-369 - Source: Kayser 1:369 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius proposes to examine only Hierocles' comparison of Apollonius of Tyana with Christ, since the rest of his Lover of Truth was borrowed and already refuted by Origen against Celsus. ### Greek text ἆρ᾽ οὖν, ὦ φιλότης, κἀκεῖνά σὲ τοῦ συγγραφέως ἄξιον ἀποθαυμάξειν, ἃ τῷ ἡμετέρῳ σωτῆρί τε καὶ διδασκάλῳ τὸν Τυανέα συγκρίνων παρεδοξολό- γει; πρὸς μὲν γὰρ τὰ λοιπὰ τῶν ἐν τῶ Φιλαλήθει, οὕτω γὰρ εὖ ἔχειν αὐτῷ τὸν καθ' ἡμῶν ἐπιγράφειν ἐδόκει λόγον, οὐδὲν ἂν εἴη σπουδαῖον ἐπὶ τοῦ παρὄντος ἵστασθαι μὴ αὐτοῦ ἴδια τυγχάνοντα, σφόδρα δὲ ἀναιδῶς ἐξ ἑτέρων οὐκ αὐτοῖς μονονουχὶ νοήμασιν, ἀλλὰ καὶ δήμασι καὶ συλλαβαῖς ἀποσεσυλημένα, (ἃ) τύχοι μὲν ἂν καὶ αὐτὰ τῆς προσηκούσης κατὰ τὸ καιρὸν ἀπελέγξεως, δυνάμει δ᾽ ἤδη καὶ πρὸ τῆς ἰδέας χατ᾽ αὐτῶν γραφῆς ἀνατέτραπται καὶ προαπελήλεγκται ἐν ὅλοις ὀχτὼ συγγράμμασι τοῖς ᾿ῶριγένει γραφεῖσι πρὸς τὸν ἀλαζονικώτερον τοῦ Φιλαλήθους ἐπιγεγραμμένον Κέλσου ᾿4ληθῆ λόγον, ᾧ τὰς εὐθύ- νας ἀπαραλείπτως, ἐν ὅσοις εἰρήκαμεν, ὁ δεδηλωμένος παραγαγὼν συλλήβδην ὅσα εἰς τὴν αὐτὴν ### English translation (Claude) Is it right, then, my friend, to admire in the writer those things too which he tells as marvels when he compares the man of Tyana with our Saviour and Teacher? For as to the rest of what is in his Lover of Truth (so he thought fit to entitle his discourse against us), there would be no point in stopping over it at present, since it is not his own but has been very shamelessly plundered from others, not only in thoughts but almost in words and syllables. Those things may receive their fitting refutation in due time; but in effect they have already been overturned and refuted in advance, even before his own writing against us, in eight whole books written by Origen against Celsus's True Discourse, a title more boastful than Lover of Truth. In these books the said author, bringing up together everything that anyone has said or will say on the same ### Translation notes - Hierocles, governor in Bithynia and Egypt under Diocletian, wrote the Lover of Truth (Φιλαλήθης λόγος) against the Christians. The work is divided here by the pages of Kayser's edition (1870), which prints no chapters. - Origen, Against Celsus, eight books; Celsus's True Discourse (Ἀληθὴς λόγος). ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 369 (Kayser 1:369; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/369). ## Kayser p. 370 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/369/#p-370 - Source: Kayser 1:370 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius quotes Hierocles' claim that Apollonius of Tyana, a man of Nero's time, worked many wonders greater than those told of Jesus. ### Greek text ὑπόθεσιν παντί τῳ εἴρηταί τε καὶ εἰρήσεται, πρόλαβὼν διελύσατο, ἐφ᾽ ἃ τοὺς ἐπ᾽ ἀκριβὲς τὰ καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς διαγνῶναι ἔχοντας φιλαλήθως ἀναπέμψαντες φέρε μόνην ἐπὶ τοῦ παρόντος τὴν κατὰ τὸν χύριον ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦν Χριστὸν τοῦ Φιλαλήθους τουτουὶ λόγου πα-ὶ ράθεσιν ἐπισκεψώμεθα μηδέν τι σπουδαῖον ἡγούμενοι πρὸς τὰ λοιπὰ τῶν ἑτέρωθεν ὑποσεσυλημένων αὐτῷ διαμάχεσθαι. μόνα δὲ εἰκότως νυνὶ τὰ περὶ τὸν ᾿Ζπολλώνιον ἐποψόμεθα, ἐπεὶ καὶ μόνῳ παρὰ τοὺς πώποτε καθ' ἡμῶν γεγραφότας ἐξαίρετος νῦν τούτῳ γέγονεν ἡ τοῦδε πρὸς τὸν ἡμέτερον σωτῆρα παράθεσίς τε καὶ σύγκρισις. Θαυμάζξει γοῦν καὶ ἀποδέχεται θείᾳ τινὶ καὶ ἀρρήτῳ σοφίᾳ, οὐχὶ δὲ γοητείας σοφέσμασι τεθαυματουργηκέναι φάσκων αὐτὸν καὶ ταῦτα ἀληθῶς οὕτως ἔχειν ὡς ἔτυχε, πιστεύων καὶ ἀναποδείκτως ἀπισχυοιξόμενος. ἄκουε δ᾽ οὖν, ἅ φησιν αὐταῖς συλλαβαῖς" »ἄνω δὲ καὶ κάτω θρυλοῦσι σεμνύνοντες τὸν Τησοῦν ὡς τυφλοῖς ἀναβλέψαι παρασχόντα καί τινα τοιαῦτα δράσαντα θαυμάσια.““ εἶτά τινα μεταξὺ εἰπὼν ἐπιλέγει".»ἐπισκεψώμεθά γε μήν, ὅσῳ βέλτιον καὶ συνετώτερον ἡμεῖς ἐκδεχόμεθα τὰ τοιαῦτα καὶ ἣν περὶ τῶν ἐναρέτων ἀνδρῶν ἔχομεν γνώμην.“ καὶ ἐπὶ τούτοις τὸν Προχοννήσιον ᾿Δριστέαν καὶ Πυθαγόραν ὡς ἂν ἀρχαιοτέρους παρελθὼν ἐπιφέρει λέγων" ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ τῶν προγόνων ἡμῶν κατὰ τὴν Νέρωνος βασιλεέαν ᾿ἀπολλώνιος ἤκμασεν ὁ Τυανεύς, ὃς ἐκ παιδὸς κομιδῇ νέου καὶ ἀφ᾽ οὗπερ ἐν Αἰγαῖς τῆς Κιλικίας ἱεράσατο τῷ φιλανθρώπῳ ᾿Ασκχληπιῷ, πολλὰ καὶ θαυμαστὰ διεπράξατο, ὧν τὰ πλείω παρεὶς ὀλίγων ποιήσομαι μνήμην.“ εἶτα καταλέγει ἀπὸ πρώτου ἀρξάμενος τὰ παράδοξα, μεθ' ἃ καὶ ἐπιλέγει ταῦτα ### English translation (Claude) subject, has solved it in advance and called each to account without omission. To these we refer those who wish to know our affairs exactly and with love of truth; and let us now examine only the comparison of our Lord Jesus Christ made in this Lover of Truth, thinking it of no importance to fight against the rest, which he has filched from elsewhere. It is reasonable that we now look only at what concerns Apollonius, since he alone, of all who have ever written against us, has made this comparison and parallel of that man with our Saviour his own special point. He admires him and accepts that he worked his wonders by a divine and ineffable wisdom and not by the sophistries of sorcery, and he believes that these things really were just as they are told, insisting on it without proof. Hear, then, what he says in his very syllables: “They go up and down making much of Jesus, as having given sight to the blind and having done some other such wonders.” Then, after saying some things in between, he adds: “Let us consider how much better and more intelligently we take such things, and what opinion we hold of virtuous men.” And after this, passing by Aristeas of Proconnesus and Pythagoras as being more ancient, he goes on to say: “But in the time of our ancestors, in the reign of Nero, there flourished Apollonius of Tyana, who from his early boyhood, and from the time when he served as priest to the benevolent Asclepius at Aegae in Cilicia, did many wonderful things; of which I shall leave aside the greater part and mention a few.” Then he enumerates his marvels, beginning from the first, and after them he adds these words ### Scripture references - Matt 11:5: allusion, low confidence ### Translation notes - Quotations from Hierocles' Lover of Truth, otherwise lost. Aristeas of Proconnesus and Pythagoras were famed for marvels; Aegae in Cilicia had a sanctuary of Asclepius. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 370 (Kayser 1:370; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/370). ## Kayser p. 371 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/369/#p-371 - Source: Kayser 1:371 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius quotes Hierocles' contrast between the uneducated apostles and the learned biographers of Apollonius, and describes the sources of Philostratus's Life of Apollonius. ### Greek text κατὰ λεξιν᾽,.τένος οὖν ἕνεκα τούτων ἐμνήσθην; ἵν᾽ ἐξῇ συγκρῖναι τὴν ἡμετέραν ἀκριβῆ καὶ βεβαίαν ἐφ᾽ ἑκάστῳ κρίσιν καὶ τὴν τῶν Χριστιανῶν κουφότητα, εἴπερ ἡμεῖς μὲν τὸν τὰ τοιαῦτα πεποιηκότα οὐ θεόν. ἀλλὰ θεοῖς κεχαρισμένον ἄνδρα ἡγούμεθα, οἱ δὲ δι᾽ ὀλίγας τερατείας τινὰς τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν θεὸν ἀναγορεύοὐυσι.““ τούτοις ἐπιφέρει μεθ᾽ ἕτερα φάσχων᾽..κάκεῖνο λογίσασθαι ἄξιον, ὅτι τὰ μὲν τοῦ ᾿Τησοῦ Πέτρος καὶ Παῦλος καί τινὲς τούτοιν παραπλήσιοι κεκομπάώχασιν ἄνθρωποι ψεῦσται καὶ ἀπαίδευτοι καὶ γόητες. τὰ δὲ ᾿ἀπολλωνίου Μάξιμος ὁ. Αἰγιεὺς καὶ Δάμις ὃ φιλόσοφος ὁ συνδιατρίψας αὐτῷ καὶ Φιλόστρατος ὃ ᾿4θηναῖος παιδεύσεως μὲν ἐπὶ πλεῖστον ἥκοντες, τὸ δ΄ ἀληθὲς τιμῶντες διὰ φιλανθρωπίαν ἀνδρὸς γενναΐίου καὶ θεοῖς φίλου πράξεις μὴ βουλόμενοι λα- θεῖν. “ ταῦτα ῥήμασιν αὐτοῖς Ἱεροκλεῖ τῷ τὸν καθ' ἡμῶν ἐπιγεγφαφότι Φιλαλήθη λόγον εἴρηται. “Ζάμις μὲν οὖν ὁ τὰ πολλὰ ξυνδιατρέψας τῷ ᾿“πολλωνίῳ ἀπὸ τὴς ᾿Δσσυρίων γῆς ὁρμώμενος αὐὖτόθι τε πρῶτον ἐπὶ τῆς ἰδίας χώρας αὐτῷ συμμίξας τὴν ἐξ ἐκείνου μετὰ τοῦ ἀνδρὸς αὐτῷ γενομένην συνουσίαν ἱστόρησεν, ὁ δὲ Μάξιμος κομιδῇ βραχέα τῶν κατὰ μέρος αὐτῷ πεπραγμένων ἀνεγρώψατο, ὅ γε μὴν ᾿4θηναῖος Φιλόστφατος τὰ φερόμενα πάντα. ὁμοῦ ἀπό τε τῶν Μαξίμου καὶ αὐτοῦ Ζ4άμιδος καὶ ἄλλων συναγαγεῖν ἑαυτὸν φήσας πάντων μάλιστα ἐντελῆ τὴν ἀπὸ γενέσεως καὶ μέχρι τελευτῆς ἱστορίαν τοῦ κατὰ τὸν ἄνδρα βίου πεποίηται. Εἰ δὴ οὖν ἐξὸν τὴν ἐπικατηγορουμένην ἡμῶν εὐχέρειάν τε καὶ κουφότητα καὶ τὴν τοῦ Φιλαλήθους ἀκριβῆ καὶ βεβαίαν ἐφ᾽ ἑκάστῳ παραθεῖναι κρίσιν, φέρε διαπυθώμεθθα. οὐχ ὅστις θειότερος γεγόνει. ### English translation (Claude) word for word: “Why, then, have I mentioned these things? So that one may compare our accurate and firm judgment in each case with the levity of the Christians; since we consider the man who did such things not a god but a man dear to the gods, while they, on account of a few wonders, proclaim Jesus a god.” After other things he adds to this: “This too is worth considering, that the deeds of Jesus have been bragged about by Peter and Paul and some others like them, liars, uneducated men and sorcerers; but those of Apollonius by Maximus of Aegae, by Damis the philosopher who lived with him, and by Philostratus of Athens, men who reached the highest point of education and honoured the truth, who out of love for mankind did not wish the deeds of a noble man and friend of the gods to remain hidden.” These things were said, in his own words, by Hierocles, who wrote the Lover of Truth against us. Damis, then, who spent most of his time with Apollonius, came from the land of the Assyrians; he first met him there in his own country, and recorded the time he spent with the man from then on. Maximus wrote down only a very few of the particular things he did. But Philostratus of Athens, saying that he had collected everything that was reported, from the works of Maximus and of Damis himself and of others, has composed the most complete history of all of the man's life from his birth to his death. Since, then, it is possible to set side by side the levity and credulity of which we are accused and the accurate and firm judgment of the Lover of Truth in each case, come, let us inquire, not which of the two was the more divine, ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 1.3, on Damis and Maximus of Aegae; no extrabiblical id exists yet for the Life of Apollonius (proposed: philostratus-vita-apollonii). ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 371 (Kayser 1:371; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/371). ## Kayser p. 372 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/369/#p-372 - Source: Kayser 1:372 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius lists the proofs of Christ's superiority, prophecy, disciples, teaching, the conversion of the world, triumph over persecution and the expulsion of demons, which he will not even seek in Apollonius. ### Greek text οὐδ᾽ ὁποῖος θαυμασιώτερά τε καὶ πλείω διεπράξατο παράδοξα, οὐδ᾽ ὡς μόνος παρὰ τοῖς ἀνέκαθεν πρὸ μυρίων ὅσων (ἐτῶν) γενομένοις Ἑβραίων σοφοῖς ὁ σωτὴρ ἡμῶν καὶ κύριος ᾿Ιησοῦς Χριστὸς ἥξευν εἰς ἀνθρώπους κατὰ θείαν ἐπίπνοιαν προπεφήτευτο, οὐδ᾽ ὡς πλείους ἐπὶ τὸν τῆς θείας διδασκαλίας αὐὖτοῦ λόγον προὐτρέψατο, οὐδ᾽ ὡς γνησίους καὶ ὄντως ἀληθεῖς ἐκτήσατο φοιτητὰς μονονουχὶ καὶ ὑπεραποθνήσκειν ἑτοίμως τῶν λόγων αὐτοῦ παρεσκευασμέτόνους. οὐδ᾽ ὡς μόνος σώφρονος βίου διδασκαλεῖον καὶ ἐς τὸν μετέπειτα χρόνον συνεστήσατο, οὐδ᾽ ὡς τῇ ἰδίᾳ θεότητί τὲ καὶ ἀρετῇ πᾶσαν ἔσωσε τὴν οἶκουμένην [καὶ] εἰσέτι καὶ νῦν μυρία πλήθη πανταχόθεν ἐπὶ τὴν θείαν ἑαυτοῦ διδασκαλίαν ἐπαγόμενος, οὐδ᾽ ὡς τῶν πώποτε μόνος πρὸς ἁπάντων σχεδὸν εἰπεῖν ἀνθρώπων ἀρχόντων τε καὶ ἀρχομένων πλείστοις ἔτεσιν ἤδη πολεμούμενος κρείττων καὶ πολὺ δυνατώτερος τῶν πικρῶς ἐλαυνόντων ἀπίστων ἀποδέδεικται θείᾳ καὶ ἀρρήτῳ δυνάμει τοὺς μὲν κατὰ καιρὸν ἐπανισταμένους αὐτοῦ τῇ θείᾳ διδασκαλίᾳ θαδίως μετιών, τὸν δὲ παγέντα πρὸς αὐτοῦ καὶ παραδοθέντα θεῖον λόγον εἰς ἄπειρον αἰῶνα καθ΄ ὅλης χρατύνων τῆς οἰκουμένης, οὐδ᾽ ὡς εἰσέτι καὶ νῦν τῆς ἐνθέου δυνάμεως τὴν ἀρετὴν ἐπιδείκνυται μο- χθηρούς τινας καὶ φαύλους δαίμονας ψυχαῖς ἀνθρώπων καὶ σώμασιν ἐφεδρεύοντας ἀπελαύνων διὰ μόνης τῆς ἀρρήτου προσηγορίας αὐτοῦ, ὡς αὐτῇ πείρᾳ κατειλήφαμεν, ταῦτα γὰρ περὶ τὸν ᾿Ζπολλώνιον ξητεῖν μὴ καὶ τὸ ἐρωτᾶν ἀνόητον᾽ μόνην δὲ ἐπισκεψώμεθα τὴν τοῦ Φιλοστράτου γραφήν, δι᾽ ἧς εὐθυνοῦμεν, ὡς οὐχ ὅτι γὲ ἐν φιλοσόφοις, ἀλλ᾽ οὐδὲ ἐν ἐπιεικέσι καὶ μετρίοις ἀνδράσιν ἄξιον ἐγκρί- ### English translation (Claude) nor which did the more wonderful and the more numerous marvels; nor how our Saviour and Lord Jesus Christ alone had been foretold by divine inspiration, among the wise men of the Hebrews who lived countless years before, as one who would come to men; nor how he drew more people to the word of his divine teaching; nor how he gained genuine and truly real disciples, prepared almost readily to die for his words; nor how he alone established a school of a temperate life for the time to come as well; nor how by his own divinity and virtue he saved the whole inhabited world, drawing even now countless multitudes from everywhere to his divine teaching; nor how he alone of all who have ever lived, though warred upon for very many years by almost all men, rulers and ruled alike, has been shown stronger and far mightier than the unbelievers who bitterly persecute him, easily dealing with those who rise up from time to time against his divine teaching by a divine and ineffable power, and establishing the divine word which he planted and handed down over the whole inhabited world for endless ages; nor how even now he shows the virtue of his divine power by driving out, through his ineffable name alone, certain wicked and base demons that lie in wait for the souls and bodies of men, as we have learned by experience. To seek these things in Apollonius, or even to ask, would be foolish. Let us examine only the writing of Philostratus, by which we hold him to account, to show that he is not worthy to be ranked, I do not say among philosophers, but even among fair and moderate men, ### Translation notes - Kayser's square brackets around καί (“and”) mark a word he deletes; it is left out. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 372 (Kayser 1:372; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/372). ## Kayser p. 373 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/369/#p-373 - Source: Kayser 1:373 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius states his own moderate view: Apollonius may be counted among philosophers, but if his biographers make him more than a philosopher, he will be shown a sorcerer. ### Greek text νειν, οὐχ ὅπως τῷ σωτῆρι ἡμῶν Χριστῷ παρατιθέναι τὸν ᾿Ζπολλώνιον ὅσον ἐπὶ τῇ γραφῇ τοῦ παρὰ τῷ Φιλαλήθει παιδεύσεως μὲν ἐπὶ πλεῖστον ἥκοντος. τὸ δ᾽ ἀληθὲς μὴ τιμῶντος συγγραφέως. τοιοῦτος γὰρ ἦν αὐτῷ μετὰ τῶν ἄλλων καὶ ὃ ᾿θηναῖος Φιλόστρα- " τος. ἐ ἐξ οὗ ῥαδίως ἂν καταμάθοιμεν καὶ τῶν λοιπῶν τῶν κατ᾽ αὐτὸν παιδεύσεως μὲν ἐπὶ πλεῖστον ἡκόντων. αὐτὸ δὲ τὸ ἐξητασμένως μὴ ἀπηκριβωμένων τῆς κατὰ τὸν ᾿Ζ“πολλώνιον ἱστορίας. τούτων γὰρ ἡμῖν διευκρινηθέντων ὁμοῦ τοῦ τε Φιλαλήθους τὰ τὸ ἀνωτάτω τε καὶ καθ᾽ ὅλων δικαστήρια διειληφότος ἡ κατὰ Χριστιανῶν βεβαία καί, ὡς αὐτὸς ἑαυτῷ δο᾽ πεῖν ἀκριβὴς ἐφ᾽ ἑκάστῳ κρίσις φανερὰ καταστήσετα ἡμῶν τε αὖ, οὗ μωροὶ καὶ βεβουκολημένοι νενομίσμεθα παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς, ἡ πρὸς αὐτῶν ἐπικαλουμένη εὐχέρειώ τε καὶ κουφότης. Ἄλλος μὲν οὖν ὁμόσε χωρῶν αὐτόθεν διέβαλλεν ἂν βλασφημῶν ὡς ἐχθρὸν αὐτῷ καὶ πολέμιον τὸν καθ' οὗ τὸν λόγον ἐποιεῖτο, ἐγὼ δέ, ἑταῖρε, σοφόν τινὰ τὰ ἀνθρώπινα τὸν Τυανέα γεγονέναι ἡγούμην καὶ ἔτι γε (τῆς) αὐτῆς ἔχεσθαι διανοίας ἑκὼν εἶναι βουλοίμην καί σοι τὴν αὐτὸς ἐμαυτοῦ περὶ αὐτοῦ δόξαν ἐκθείην ἂν ἐρωτῶντι" φιλοσόφων μὲν ὅτῳ τις βούλοιτο (συγ)καταλέγειν τὸν ἄνδρα πέρα μηδὲν διενοχλῶν ταῖς περὶ αὐτοῦ μυθολογίαις, μὴ φθονεῖν, εἰ δ᾽ ὑπερπηδᾶν τοὺς ὅρους καὶ φιλοσοφίας ὑπέρτερα φρονεῖν εἴτε τις Ζίάμις ᾿άσσύριος. εἴτε Φιλόστραᾶτος, εἴτε τις συγγραφεὺς ἢ λογογράφος θρασύψοιτο λόγῳ μὲν ἐκτρεπόμενος γοητείαν, ἔργοις δὲ πλέον ἢ ῥήμασιν ἐπιφορτίζων τὸν ἄνδρα προσωπείου δίκην τὴν Πυθαγόρειον ἐπιμορφαξόμενος ἀγωγήν, οἰχήσεται μὲν ἡμῖν ὁ φιλόσοφος, ὄνος δ᾽ ἀντὶ τοῦ ### English translation (Claude) much less to set Apollonius beside our Saviour Christ, as far as concerns the account of the writer who, in the Lover of Truth's words, reached the highest point of education but did not honour the truth. For such, among the others, was Philostratus of Athens, according to him; and from him we may easily learn the case with the rest of his kind, men who reached the highest point of education but did not examine and verify the history of Apollonius. When we have made this clear, the firm and, as he thinks, accurate judgment against the Christians of the Lover of Truth, who has taken upon himself the highest courts and those over all, will be made plain; and so will the credulity and levity with which they charge us, whom they think fools and dupes. Another man would come to close quarters at once and slander the one against whom he was arguing, reviling him as his enemy and foe. But I, my friend, have thought that the man of Tyana was wise in human affairs, and I should still gladly hold to that opinion; and if you asked me I would set out my own view of him. If anyone wishes to count the man among philosophers, without troubling further with the fables about him, I do not grudge it. But if some Damis the Assyrian, or Philostratus, or some historian or speech-writer, should be so bold as to overstep the bounds and think higher than philosophy, turning away from sorcery in word but loading the man with it in deeds more than words, masking himself with the Pythagorean way of life like an actor, then the philosopher will be gone from us, and in place of the ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 373 (Kayser 1:373; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/373). ## Kayser p. 374 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/369/#p-374 - Source: Kayser 1:374 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius argues that nature has fixed limits for every kind, so that no man can go beyond the human condition. ### Greek text λέοντος ἐπικρυπτόμενος δέρρει σοφιστής τις ὡς ἀλήηθῶς ἀγείρων κατὰ τὰς πόλεις αὐτό τε τοῦτο γόης ἀτεχνῶς ἀντὶ φιλοσόφου φωραθήσεται. πῶς δὲ τοῦτό φημι καὶ πόθεν ὁρμώμενος, ἐρωτᾶς; μάνθανε" ὅρον φύσεως ἀρχὰς καὶ μέσα καὶ τέλη τῆς τῶν ὅλων οὐσίας περιξειληφότες μέτρα καὶ θεσμοὶ ἅπασι, δι ὦ ὧν τόδε τὸ πᾶν μηχάνημά τε καὶ ἀρχιτεκτόνημα τοῦ παντὸς κόσμου τελεσιουργεῖται, διατέθεινται. νόμοις ἀλύτοις καὶ δεσμοῖς ἀρρήκτοις τῆς τὰ πάντα οἰκονο- μούσης προνοίας τὸ πάνσοφον βούλημα διαφυλάττοντες. οὔκουν κινήσειέ τι καὶ μεταθείη {τις ἂν) τῆς τάξεως τῶν ἅπαξ διατεθειμένων. κεκράτηται δ᾽ οὐν θεσμῷ φύσεως τὸν θεῖον ὑπεραναβαίνειν νόμον πᾶς. ὅτῳ τις θρασύτερος τῶν ἐπέκεινα (ἐπὴβαίνειν ἔνεστι πόθος. οὔτ᾽ οὖν παρὰ φύσιν ὃ ἔνυδρος ἐπὶ ὁ τὴν χέρσον μεταβὰς βιῶναι δυνήσεται ἰχθύς, οὔτε τὸ ἐν χέρσῳ τραφὲν τοῖς ὕδασιν ἐγκαταδύσεται τὴν ἐκεῖσε διηνεκῆ μονὴν ἀσπαξόμενον, οὔτε μέγα πηδήσας μετέωρός τις τῶν ἐπὶ γῆς ἀρθήσεται πρὸς ἀέρα συμπεριπολεῖν ἀετοῖς ἐπιθυμῶν᾽ καὶ μὴν ἐκεῖνοί γε κἂν ἐπὶ γῆς ἔλθοιεν βρίσαντες ἐπὶ τὸ κάτω τὴν δύναμὺν καὶ τοῦ πτεροῦ χαλάσαντες καὶ ἀνέντες τὴν φύσιν, ἐπεὶ καὶ τοῦτο θείοις ὥρισται νόμοις, (ἐκ) τοῦ ὕψους τὸ μετέωρον -ὑποκαταβαίνειν δύνασθαι, οὐ μὴν καὶ ἔμπαλιν τὸ ταπεινὸν καὶ γεῶδες ἐπὶ τὸ μετέωρον αἴρεσθαι. ταύτῃ δὴ καὶ τὸ θνητὸν ἀνθοώπῶν γένος ψυχῆς μετέχον καὶ σώματος ὅροις περιγέγραπται, θείοις. οὔτ᾽ οὖν τῷ σώματι δι ἀέρος ἔλθοι ποχὲ τῶν ἐπὶ γῆς τις καταφρονήσας διατριβὼν μὴ οὐχὶ τοὐπιτίμιον αὐτέκα τῆς ἀνοίας παρασχών, οὔτε τὴν ψυχὴν ἀρθεὶς φρονήματι καθίέξεται τῶν ἀνεφίκτων, ἢ μελαγχολίας νοσήματι ἂν περιπέσοι.. ### English translation (Claude) lion an ass hiding in its skin will be found out, a sophist truly going round the cities collecting money, and in fact simply a sorcerer instead of a philosopher. How do I say this, you ask, and on what grounds? Learn. The limits of nature, which embrace the beginnings, middles and ends of the substance of all things, measures and laws, have been laid down for all things, by which this whole machine and architecture of the whole world is brought to completion, preserving with unbreakable laws and bonds the all-wise will of the providence that orders all things. No one could move or change anything of the order of what has once been laid down. It has been fixed by the law of nature that everyone who has a bolder longing to go beyond to what lies beyond is restrained from overstepping the divine law. A fish that lives in water will not be able to pass to dry land and live there contrary to nature; nor will a creature reared on dry land plunge into the waters and welcome a lasting dwelling there; nor will any of the creatures on earth, however high it leaps, be lifted into the air because it longs to soar with the eagles. Those birds, indeed, may come to earth, weighing their strength downward, slackening the wing and relaxing their nature, since this too is defined by divine laws, that what is aloft can come down from the height, but not, conversely, that what is low and earthy can be raised aloft. In this way the mortal race of men too, sharing soul and body, is bounded by divine limits. No one on earth, despising life on earth, could ever go through the air with his body without at once paying the penalty for his folly; nor, raised in mind, will he reach things beyond his reach, or else he would fall into the disease of melancholy. ### Extrabiblical texts - Aesop (Aesop, Fables): allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - The ass in the lion's skin is Aesop's fable (cf. Aesop, Fab. 188 Perry). ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 374 (Kayser 1:374; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/374). ## Kayser p. 375 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/369/#p-375 - Source: Kayser 1:375 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius argues that the divine nature may come down to men in its goodness, and that one sent from God would enlighten the world and leave lasting works. ### Greek text σωφρονοῖ δ᾽ ἂν ἀρτίοις μὲν τὸ σῶμα ποσὶν ἐπὶ γῆς φερόμενος, τὴν δὲ ψυχὴν παιδείᾳ καὶ φιλοσοφίᾳ σκηρίπτων., εὔξαιτο δὲ καί τινα συνεργὸν ἄνωθέν ποθὲν ἐκ τῶν κατ᾽ οὐρανὸν διατριβῶν ἐλθεῖν καὶ τῆς ἐκεῖσε διδάσκαλον αὐτῷ φανῆναι σωτηρίας. ἐρ- ρωμένῳ γάρ τοι παραδείγματι νοσοῦντι μὲν τὸν ἰατρὸν ἐπιφοιτᾶν θέμις, καὶ τὸν διδάσκαλον εἰσαγομένῳ τοῖς μαθήμασι συμφέφεσθαι καὶ τὸν ἄνω που καὶ ἐν ὕψει συγκατιέναι τοῖς ταπεινοῖς. οὐ μὴν καὶ ἀνάπαλιν. ὅθεν δὴ θείαν μὲν φύσιν εὐεργέτιν οὖσαν καὶ σώτειραν καὶ προνοητικὴν τῶν (ἐπι)δόντων ἀνθοώποις ποτὲ εἰς ὁμιλίαν ἐλθεῖν οὐδεὶς ἂν ἀπείργοι λόγος ὅρῳ θείας προνοίας καὶ τούτου συγκεχωρημένου, ἀγαθὸς γὰρ ἦν κατὰ τὸν Πλάτωνα, ἀγαθῷ δὲ οὐδεὶς περὶ οὐδενὸς ἐγγίνεται φθόνος᾽ οὔκουν τὸ σωμάτων μόνων ἀγαθὸς ὧν ὁ τόδε τὸ πᾶν διακυβερνῶν ἐπιμελήσεται, πολὺ πλέον δὲ ψυχῶν, αἷς τὸ ἀθάνατόν τε καὶ αὐτοχρατορικὸν κεχάρισται γέρας. ταύταις δῆτα οἷα τῆς οἰκονομίας ἁπάσης κύριος ὧν καὶ χαρίτων, ὧν ἂν δωρούμενος αὐτὰς εὐεργετῇ τὴν φύσιν οὔσαις ἀντιληπτικαῖς ἀκτῖνας ὥσπερ τοῦ παρ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ φωτὸς δωρήσεται ἀφθόνως τῶν ἀμφ᾽ αὐτόν, ἔστιν ὅτε τοὺς μάλιστα προσεχεῖς εἰς τὴν τῶν ἐπίταδὲ σωτηρίαν τε καὶ ἀντίληψιν ἐκπέμπων, ὧν εἴ τῷ εὐτυχῆσαι γένοιτο, τὴν διάνοιαν οὗτος ἀποκα- θαρθεὶς καὶ τὴν τῆς θνητότητος ἀποσκεδάσας ἀχλὺν θεῖος ἀληθῶς ἀναγραφήσεται μέγαν τινὰ θεὸν ἀγαλματοφορῶν (ἐν) τῇ ψυχῇ. κινήσεις δῆτ᾽ ἂν οἷα τηλικοῦτος τὸ πάντων ἀνθρώπων γένος καὶ μᾶλλὸν ἡλίου τὴν οἰχουμένην καταλάμψειε τοὔργον τῆς αἰδίου θεότητος καὶ εἰς τὸν ἐπιόντα συνορᾶσθαι καταλείπων χρόνον οὐ μεῖον τῶν ἐξ ἀψύχου ὕλης ### English translation (Claude) He would be wise to go on earth with sound feet in body, and to support his soul with education and philosophy, and to pray that some helper may come to him from above, from the dwellings in heaven, and appear to him as teacher of the salvation that is there. For by a strong example, it is right for the physician to visit the sick, for the teacher to come together with the beginner in his lessons, and for the one above and on high to come down to the lowly; but not the reverse. Therefore no argument would forbid that the divine nature, being beneficent, saving, and provident for those who give themselves to it, should once come into converse with men, since this too is granted by the limit of divine providence. For he was good, according to Plato, and in the good no envy arises about anything. The good one who governs this universe will not care for bodies alone, but much more for souls, to which the prize of immortality and self-rule has been granted. To these, as the lord of all the ordering of things and of the graces by which he benefits their nature, which is able to receive them, he will generously give rays, as it were, of the light that is his own, sometimes sending those of his company who are most closely joined to him for the salvation and help of those here. If anyone is so fortunate as to meet one of these, he is purified in mind, scatters the mist of mortality, and will truly be recorded as divine, bearing in his soul the image of a great God. Such a one would stir the whole race of men and would light up the inhabited world more than the sun, leaving the work of the eternal Godhead for the time to come to behold, no less than the works made from soulless matter, ### Extrabiblical texts - Plato, Tim. 29e (Plato (works)): quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Plato, Tim. 29e: “he was good, and in the good no envy ever arises about anything” (quoted). ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 375 (Kayser 1:375; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/375). ## Kayser p. 376 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/369/#p-376 - Source: Kayser 1:376 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius demands that if Apollonius was divine, his biographer show it consistently and in lasting works, and begins to examine the story of his birth. ### Greek text δημιουργημάτων τὸ τῆς ἐνθέου παράδειγμα. φύσεως παρεσχημένος. καὶ ταύτῃ μὲν ἀνθρωπεία φύσις τῆς ὑπὲρ ἄνθρωπον κοινωνήσαι ἄν, ἄλλως δ᾽ οὐ θέμις τοὺς ὄρους ὑπερβαίνειν, οὐδ᾽ ἄπτερον ἔχοντα τὸ σῶμα τὰ τῶν πτηνῶν ἐπιτηδεύειν. οὐδ᾽ ἄνθρωπον ὄντα τὰ τῶν δαιμόνων πολυπραγμονεῖν. Τίνα δῆτα ἡμῖν ἐπὶ τούτοις τὸν ᾿ἀπολλώνιον { εἰσάγεις, ῶ συγγφαφεῦ; εἰ μὲν δὴ θεῖον καὶ φιλοσόφου κρείττονα τήν τε φύσιν ἁπλῶς εἰπεῖν ὑπὲρ ἄνθρωπον, τήφει μοι δι᾽ ὅλης τῆς ἱστορίας τὴν ὑπόθεσιν καὶ τούργον εἰσέτι νῦν ἐπιδείκνυθι τῆς θειό-τητος. ἦ γὰρ οὐκ ἀτοπώτατον τεκτόνων μὲν καὶ οἰκοδόμων καὶ μετὰ τὴν τῶν δημιουργῶν τελευτὴν ἐπὶ μήκιστον τούργον διαρκεῖν ἀθάνατόν που δχετὸ δὸν τῶν συστησαμένων τὴν μνήμην στηλιτεῦον. θείαν δὲ ἄρα φύσιν ἀνθοώποις ἐπιλάμψασαν σκότιόν που καὶ μινυνθάδιον ἀποτελεῖν. οὐχὶ δὲ εἰς αἰῶνα τὴν ἀρετὴν ἐπιδείκνυσθαι, μὴ εἰς ἕνα τινὰ Ζάμιν ἡ καὶ ἄλλους βραχεῖς πτωχεύουσαν τῶν ἀνθρώπων, ἀλλ᾽ εἰς μυρίων ὅσων ὠφελείας οὐ τῶν καθ᾽ ὃν (χρόνον) ἐγνωρίζετο μόνων, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν μετὰ ταῦτα γενησομένων τὴν πάροδον ποιουμένην; ταύτῃ τοι καὶ τοὺς πάλαι σοφοὺς ξζηλωτᾶς τε καὶ διαδόχους ποιήσασθαι τῆς ἀρετῆς ἀθάνατον ὡς ἀληθῶς ἀνθρώποις παρε- σχημένους τὸ κατόρθωμα. ἢ εἰ δὲ θνητὴν ὑπογράφεις τἀνδρὸς τὴν φύσιν. ὅρα μὴ πλέον, ἢ προσῆκε, ταύτῃ χαριζόμενος δίκην ἀποίσεις παραλογίας. ἀλλὰ μὴν εἰσήκται αὐτῷ θεῖος ἄνθρωπος καὶ θαλαττίου δαίμονος σχῆμά τὲ καὶ προσωπεῖον ἀπὸ γενέσεως ἀναλαμβάνων..««κυούσῃ γάρ,“ ὥς φησι, τῇ αὐτοῦ μητρὶ φάσμα ἦλθε θαλαττίου δαίμονος, Πρωτεὺς ὃ παρὰ τῷ Ὁμήρῳ ἐξαλλάττων. ἡ δὲ οὐδὲν δείσασα ### English translation (Claude) having provided the pattern of a divine nature. In this way human nature might share in what is above man; but otherwise it is not right to overstep the limits, nor for one whose body is wingless to practise the ways of birds, nor for one who is a man to meddle with the affairs of spirits. Whom, then, do you bring before us as Apollonius, writer? If he is divine and better than a philosopher, in a word above man in nature, keep this assumption for me throughout the whole history, and show the work of his divinity even now. For is it not most absurd that the work of carpenters and builders should last a very long time even after the death of the makers, as a kind of immortal monument publishing the memory of those who built it, while a divine nature that has shone on men should achieve something dark and short-lived, and not show its virtue for ever, not beggared for one Damis or a few other men, but making its way to the benefit of countless men, not only of those of the time when it was known, but also of those to be born afterward? In this way the wise men of old made men zealous imitators and successors of their virtue, providing them a truly immortal achievement. But if you describe the man's nature as mortal, see that you do not pay the penalty for unreason by favouring it more than is fitting. Yet he is presented by him as a divine man, taking on from his very birth the form and mask of a sea spirit. “For to his mother,” he says, “when she was pregnant, there came the apparition of a sea spirit, Proteus, who in Homer changes his shape. She was not at all afraid ### Extrabiblical texts - Homer, Od. 4.351–570 (Homer, Odyssey): allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 1.4 (Proteus appears to Apollonius's mother), quoted. Proteus: Homer, Od. 4.351–570. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 376 (Kayser 1:376; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/376). ## Kayser p. 377 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/369/#p-377 - Source: Kayser 1:377 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius collects the claims of Philostratus that Apollonius was divine, knew all languages untaught and ascended bodily, and asks why he was then sent to a teacher. ### Greek text ἤρετο αὐτόν, τί ἀποκυήσοι, ὁ δὲ..ἐμὲδ'΄ εἶπε᾽,.σὺ δὲ τίρ““ εἰπούσης.. Πρωτεὺς“ ἔφη..ὃ Αἰγύπτιος." εἶτα δὲ λειμῶνά τινα. καὶ κύκνους τὴν γυναῖκα μαιεύεσθαι γράφει, ὁπόθεν αὐτὸ τοῦτ᾽ εἴη ληφθέν, μὴ εἰπών" οὐ γὰρ δὴ καὶ τούτου ὑγηγητὴν “Ιαμιν ὃ τὸν ᾿ἀσσύριον ὑπογράψεται. ἀλλὰ καὶ οὐκ ἐς μακρὸν τῆς αὐτῆς ἱστορίας αὐτῷ 4άμιδι οἷα δὴ θείας ὄντα φύσεως τὸν ᾿Ζπολλώνιον εἰσάγει αὐτὰ δὴ ταῦτα λέγοντα᾽..ἐγώ, ὦ ἑταῖρε, πασῶν τῶν φωνῶν ξυνίημι μαθὼν οὐδεμίαν" ““ καὶ «.«ὐἡ θαυμάσῃς. οἶδα γὰρ τὸ καὶ ἃ σιωπῶσιν οἵ ἄνθρωποι.““ καὶ πάλιν ἐν ᾿4σκληπιοῦ τιμώμενον πρὸς τοῦ δαίμονος καὶ πρόγνωσιν φυσικήν τινα καὶ ἀδίδακτον ἔχειν ἐκ παιδὸς κρείττονάώ τε ἀτεχνῶς ἀνθρώπου φῦναι αὐτὸν ἐξ αὐτῆς γενέσεως καὶ δι᾽ ὅλης ἡμῖν τῆς ἱστορίας ὑπογράφει. τὸ λύσαντος γοῦν ἑαυτόν ποτε ἀπὸ δεσμῶν ἐπιφέρει λέγων"..τότε πρῶτον ὁ Ζάμις φησὶν ἀκριβῶς ξυνεἴναι τῆς ᾿ἀπολλωνίου φύσεως. ὅτι θεία τε εἴη καὶ κρείττων ἀνθρώπου. μὴ γὰρ θύσαντά τὶ, πῶς γὰρ ἐν δεσμωτηρίῳ; μηδὲ εὐξάμενον. μηδὲ εἰπόντα τι »καταγελάσαι τοῦ δεσμοῦ.“ ἐπὶ τελευτῇ δὲ τάφον μὲν αὐτοῦ μηδόλως ποι γῆς εὐρίσκεσθαι, χωρῆσαι δὲ εἰς οὐρανὸν αὐτῷ σώματι μεθ᾽ ὕμνων καὶ χορείας λέγει. εἰκότως δὴ οὖν οἷα ὄντα τοσοῦτον..θειότερον ἢ Πυθαγόρας Ἐμπεδοκλῆς τε καὶ Πλάτων φιλοσοφίᾳ τὸν ἄνδρα προσεληλυθέναι φησίν. οὐκοῦν ἐν θιεοῖς ἡμῖν διὰ τούτων ἀναγεγράφθω ὁ ἄνθρωπος καὶ ὃ φθόνος ἀπέστω τῆς τῶν φωνῶν ἁπασῶν αὐτοφυοῦς χαὶ αὐτοδιδάλτου συνέσεως. τέ δῆτα οὖν ἐς διδασκάλου ἄγει αὐτὸν καὶ τὸν μηδεμέαν φωνὴν μεμα- θηκότα διαβάλλει ὡς ἂν ἐξ ἀσκήσεως καὶ μελέτης, ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἐκ φύσεως ᾿Δττικὸν γενόμενον τὴν γλῶτταν; ### English translation (Claude) and asked him what she would bear. He said, ‘Me.’ ‘And who are you?’ she asked. ‘Proteus,’ he said, ‘the Egyptian god.’” Then he writes that a meadow and swans attended the woman as midwives, without saying where this was taken from; for surely Damis the Assyrian will not be set down as the narrator of this too. And not long after, in the same history, he brings in Apollonius as being of a divine nature, saying to Damis himself these very words: “I, my friend, understand all languages, though I have learned none,” and, “Do not be surprised; I know also what men keep silent.” And again he describes him as honoured by the god in the temple of Asclepius, and as having a natural and untaught foreknowledge from childhood, and as born simply better than a man from his very birth, and so throughout the whole history. When he once freed himself from fetters, he adds: “Then first, says Damis, he understood exactly the nature of Apollonius, that it was divine and better than a man's; for without sacrificing anything (how could he, in prison?), without praying, without saying anything, he laughed at the fetter.” At the end he says that no tomb of his is found anywhere on earth, but that he went to heaven in his body with hymns and dances. Naturally, then, as being so much “more divine than Pythagoras, Empedocles and Plato,” he says the man came to philosophy. Let the man, then, be enrolled among the gods by us on these grounds, and let envy be absent from his innate and self-taught understanding of all languages. Why, then, does he take him to a teacher, and slander one who learned no language, as if he became Attic in speech by practice and study and not by nature? ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 1.5, 1.19, 1.8, 7.38, 8.30, 1.2 (quoted or summarized). ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 377 (Kayser 1:377; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/377). ## Kayser p. 378 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/369/#p-378 - Source: Kayser 1:378 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius points out that Philostratus has Apollonius taught by rhetoricians, philosophers and Arabs who learned animal speech by eating serpents' hearts, contrary to his supposed innate knowledge and Pythagorean diet. ### Greek text φησὶ γάρ τοι, ὡς προϊὼν ἐς ἡλικίαν γράμματά τε καὶ μνήμης ἰσχὺν ἐδήλου καὶ μελέτης κράτος καὶ ἣ : γλῶττα αὐτῷ ἀττικῶς εἶχε.“ καὶ..γεγονότα δὲ αὐὖ- : τὸν ἔτη τεσσαρεσκαίδεκα ἄγει ἐς Ταρσοὺς ὁ πατὴρ παρ᾽ Εὐθύδημον τὸν ἐκ Φοινίκης, ὃς δήτωρ τε ἀγαθὸς ἣν καὶ ἐπαίδευε τοῦτον, ὁ δὲ τοῦ διδασχάλου εἴχετο." εἶτα »ξυνεφιλοσόφουν αὐτῷ Πλατώνειοί. τὸ καὶ Χρυσίππειοι καὶ οἱ ἀπὸ τοῦ περιπάτου. διήκουὲ δὲ καὶ τῶν ᾿Επικούρου λόγων, οὐδὲ γὰρ τούτόνους ἀπεσπούδαξε, τοὺς δὲ Πυθαγορείους ἀρρήτῳ τινὶ σοφίᾳ ξυνελάμβανε.“" τοσαῦτα ὁ μηδεμίαν μαθὼν φωνὴν θείᾳ τὲ δυνάμει..«ἃ καὶ σιωπῶσιν ἄνθρωποι προλαβὼν ἐξεπαιδεύετο. ὁ δὲ διαλιπὼν αὖθις αὐτὸν θαυμάξει, ἐς ὅσον συνέσεως τῆς τῶν ζώων φωνῆς ἦλθε καὶ ἐπιφέρει λέγων,.καὶ ἐς ξύν- εσιν δὲ τῆς τῶν ξῴων φωνῆς ἦλθε, καὶ ἔμαθε δὲ τοῦτο διὰ τῶν ᾿Ζραβίων πορευόμενος ἄριστα γιγνωσχόντων τε καὶ πραττόντων αὐτό. ἔστι γὰρ τῶν ᾿Δφραβίων κύκνων ἤδη καὶ ὀρνίθων μαντευομένων ᾿ ἄκούειν, ὁπόσα οἵ χρησμοί. ξυμβάλλονται δὲ τῶν ἀλόγων σιτούμενοι τῶν δρακόντων οἱ μὲν καρδίαν. φασίν, οἵ δὲ ἧπαρ.“ ἐνταῦθα πάντως που δρακόντῶν καρδίας δήπου καὶ ἥπατος τὸν Πυθαγόρειον ἐμψύχων τε τροφῆς ἀπεχόμενον καὶ μηδὲ θύειν δαί- μοσιν ἐπιτολμῶντα εἰκὸς ἣν ἀπογεύσασθαι, ὡς ἂν ᾿ χαὶ τῆς παρὰ τούτοις κοινωνήσοι σοφίας. πρὸς γὰρ τοιῶνδε διδασχομένῳ πῶς ἂν ἄλλως μὴ οὐχὶ τὰ ὅμοια τοῖς διδασκάλοις ξηλώσαντι κατωρθοῦτο τὸ ἐπιτήδευμα; ἔχομεν δὴ οὖν πρὸς τοῖς καταλελεγμένοις καὶ τοὺς ᾿ἀραβίων σοφοὺς διδασκάλους τῆς κατὰ τὴν οἰωνιστικὴν τἀνδρὸς ἐπιστήμης, ἀφ᾽ ἧς εἰκότως δρμώμενος ὕστερόν ποτε τὸν στρουθόν, ὅ τι καὶ ### English translation (Claude) For he says that “as he grew in years he showed letters, power of memory and strength of application, and his tongue was Attic”; and “when he was fourteen years old his father took him to Tarsus to Euthydemus of Phoenicia, who was a good rhetorician and taught him, and he attached himself to his teacher.” Then: “Platonists, Chrysippeans and Peripatetics studied philosophy with him; he also heard the doctrines of Epicurus, for he did not despise these either, but he grasped those of the Pythagoreans with an ineffable wisdom.” So much was the man taught who had learned no language and by divine power knew in advance even what men keep silent! After an interval he again admires him for how far he came in understanding the speech of animals, and adds: “He came to understand the speech of animals too, and learned this while travelling through Arabia from the Arabs, who know and practise it best. For it is possible among the Arabs to hear swans and birds prophesying like oracles; and they understand the irrational creatures by eating, some say, the heart of serpents, others the liver.” Here, surely, it was fitting that the Pythagorean, who abstained from animal food and would not dare even to sacrifice to spirits, should taste the hearts and livers of serpents, so as to share in the wisdom of these people! For how else could one taught by such men achieve the practice, unless he imitated his teachers in the same things? So besides those already listed we have the wise men of the Arabs as teachers of the man's science of augury, from which naturally he started when, later on, the sparrow, what ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 1.7, 1.20 (quoted). ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 378 (Kayser 1:378; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/378). ## Kayser p. 379 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/369/#p-379 - Source: Kayser 1:379 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius notes that Philostratus has Apollonius study privately with the Magi and claim the wisdom of Pythagoras, though his Pythagorean teacher was an Epicurean in practice. ### Greek text βούλοιτο συγκαλῶν τοὺς ἑτέρους ἐπὶ τροφήν, προεἰπὼν θαῦμα μέγιστον παρέχειν ἔδοξε τοῖς παροῦσι. ταύτῃ δὴ καὶ τὴν ἀπεσφαγμένην ὅσον οὔπω λέαιναν ἅμα τοῖς ὀκτὼ σκύμνοις κατὰ τὴν εἰς ᾿Δσσυρίους ὁδὸν θεασάμενος αὐτίχα τῷ θεάματι συμβαλὼν τῆς ἐσομένης αὐτῷ παρὰ Πέρσαις διατριβῆς τὸν χρόνον ἐμαντεύσατο. ἀκόλουθα δὲ τῇ παρὰ τοῖς ᾿“ραβίοις φοιτήσει ἐγχειρεῖν αὐτὸν καὶ παρὰ Πέρσαις ὃ αὐτὸς συγγραφεὺς ἱστορεῖ" τῷ γάρ τοι “άμιδι, ὃς μόνος φοιτητὴς ἦν αὐτῷ καὶ ἑταῖρος, «ἀπαγορεύσας “παρὰ τοὺς μάγους ἰέναι μόνος αὐτός, ὡς ἂν μὴ μετ᾽ ἀγνώμόνος δηλαδὴ τὰ τῆς μαγείας μανθάνοι, μεσημβρίας τε καὶ ἀμφὶ μέσας νύκτας τὸς μετ᾽ αὐτῶν ἐποιεῖτο σχολάς. ἔτι δὲ Οὐαρδάνῃ Βαβυλωνίῳ εἰς λόγους ἐλθόντα βάσιλεῖ ὧδέ πως λέγειν αὐτὸν παρατίθεται" «σοφία δέ μοι Πυθαγόρου Σαμίου ἀνδρός. ὃς θεούς τε θεραπεύειν ὧδέ με ἐδιδάξατο καὶ ξυνιέναι σφῶν ὁρωμένων τε καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένων φοιτᾶν τε ἐς διαλέξεις θεῶν.““ τίς δ᾽ αὐτῷ ταῦτα συγχωρήσειεν, ὅτε Πυθαγόρᾳ μὲν οὐδεμία τις τοιαύτη καταλέλειπται γραφή, οὐδ᾽ ἀπόρρητά τινα συγγράμματα, ὡς κἂν ὑπονοῆσαι αὐτὸν ἐξ ἐκείνων ὁρμᾶσθαι, ὁ δὲ γε διδάσκαλος αὐτῷ τῆς κατὰ Πυθαγόραν φιλοσοφίας οὐδέν τι διαφέρειν τῶν ᾿Επικουρείων πρὸς αὐτοῦ μεμαρτύρηται τοῦ Φιλοστράτου. ὧδέ πὼς εἰρηκότος διδάσκαλος μὲν ἦν αὐτῷ τῶν Πυθαγόρου λόγων οὐ πάνυ σπουδαῖος, οὐδ᾽ ἐνεργῷ τῇ φιλοσοφίᾳ χρώμενος. γαστρός τὲ ἥττων καὶ ἀφροδισίων καὶ κατὰ τὸν Ἐπίκουρον ἐσχημάτιστο. ἦν δὲ οὗτος Εὔξενος ὁ ἐξ Ἡρακλείας τοῦ Πόντου. τὰς δὲ Πυθαγόρου γνώμας ἐγίγνωσκεν, ὥσπερ οἵ ὄρνιθες ἃ μανθάνουσι παρὰ τῶν ἀνθρώπων. «φεῦ τῆς ἀτοπίας. εἰ παρὰ ### English translation (Claude) it meant when it called the others to food, he seemed by foretelling it to present a very great wonder to those present. In the same way, seeing on the road to the Assyrians a lioness just slaughtered together with her eight cubs, he at once inferred from the sight and foretold the length of the stay he would make among the Persians. In keeping with his schooling among the Arabs, the same writer relates that he set to work among the Persians too. For he forbade Damis, who was his only disciple and companion, to go to the Magi, and went alone, so that he might learn the arts of magic, evidently, without a witness; and he held his sessions with them at noon and about midnight. Further, he represents him, when he came into conversation with Vardanes, king of Babylon, as speaking thus: “My wisdom is that of Pythagoras, a man of Samos, who taught me to worship the gods in this way, to understand them whether seen or unseen, and to frequent the conversations of the gods.” But who would grant him this, when Pythagoras left no such writing, nor any secret treatises, from which one might suspect that he took his start; while his teacher in the philosophy of Pythagoras is testified by Philostratus himself to have differed in no way from the Epicureans? For he speaks roughly thus: “His teacher of the doctrines of Pythagoras was not at all serious, nor did he practise his philosophy in deed; he was a slave to his belly and to sexual pleasures and modelled himself on Epicurus. This was Euxenus of Heraclea in Pontus. He knew the maxims of Pythagoras as birds know what they learn from men.” Alas for the absurdity, if anyone should say that from ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 1.22, 1.26, 1.32, 1.7 (quoted). ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 379 (Kayser 1:379; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/379). ## Kayser p. 380 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/369/#p-380 - Source: Kayser 1:380 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius argues that no Pythagorean ever claimed converse with the gods, so that either Apollonius's teachers or his divinity must be a fiction. ### Greek text τούτου λέγοι τις τῆς πρὸς τοὺς θεοὺς διαλέξεως τὴν σύνεσιν αὐτὸν εἰληφέναι. ἀλλὰ δὴ συγκεχωρήσθω καὶ ἑτέρων ὑφηγητῶν αὐτὸν ἀκηκοέναι καίτοι γὲ τοῦ συγγραφέως τοῦτο μηδαμῶς ἐπισημηναμένου" τίς δὴ οὖν τούτων σύνεσίν τὲ καὶ φοίτησιν (εἰς διαλέξεις) θεῶν ὁρωμένων καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένων αὐτός τε ὡς ἀπὸ Πυθαγόρου (μαθὼν) εἰδέναι διδάσκεσθαέ τὲ ἑτέρους ἐπηγγέλλετο; καὶ μὴν οὐδ᾽ ὁ περιβόητος Πλάτων πάντων γε μᾶλλον τῆς Πυθαγόρου κεκοινωνηκὼς φιλοσοφίας, οὔτ᾽ ᾽'άρχύτας, οὔτ᾽ αὐτὸς ἐκεῖ-νος ὁ τὰς Πυθαγόρου γραφῇ παραδοὺς ὁμιλίας Φιλόλαος. οὐδ᾽ εἴ τινες ἄλλοι γνώριμοι τἀνδρὸς γεγογνότες. οἱ δόξας τε αὐτοῦ χαὶ γνώμας γραφῇ τοῖς μετ᾽ αὐτὸν παραδεδώκασιν. ἐπὶ τοιαύτῃ τινὶ ἐσεμνύναντο σοφίᾳ. οὐκοῦν ἑτέρωθεν, ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἀπὸ Πυθαγόρου τὰ τοιαδὶ μαθὼν προσχήματι σεμνολογῶν ἐπιγράφεται τὴν τοῦ φιλοσόφου πρόσρησιν, ἵνα δὲ καὶ παραλογώτατα τὸ ψεῦδος ὡς ἀληθές τις γεγονέναι συγχωρήσειεν. οὐκ οἶδ᾽ ὅπως ἐξ αὐτοῦ λέγων ἐκείνου τοῦ Σαμίου πρὸ μυρίων ὅσων ἐτῶν ἐξ ἀνθρώπων γενομένου τὰ περὶ τούτων αὐτὸν μεμαθηκέναι. οὐκοῦν πρὸς τοῖς ᾽Δραβίοις καὶ τοῦτον διδάσχαλον αὐτοῦ τῆς δὴ νομιξομένης ἀπορρήτου περὶ θεῶν ἐπιστήμης ἐπιγραπτέον. εἰ δὴ οὖν θείας ἦν φύσεως. κατέψευσται αὐτοῦ τοὺς διδασκάλους ὁ λόγος, εἰ δ᾽ ἀληθὴς ἦν οὗτος, ψευδὴς ἦν ὁ μῦθος καὶ οὐκ ἀληθὴς ἡ περὶ τοῦ θεῖον γεγονέναι αὐτὸν γραφή. οὔπω μοι τοῦ Πρωτέως τὸ φάσμα πολυπραγμονεῖν ἔπεισι καὶ τὴν περὶ τούτου πίστιν αἰτεῖν, οὐδὲ τῶν παρ᾽ αὐτῷ κύκνων τὰς ἀποδείξεις, οὕς γελοίως τὴν μητέρα τίχτουσαν αὐτὸν μαιοῦσθαι ἱστορεῖ. ἀλλ᾽ οὐδὲ τῆς περὶ τοῦ σχηπτοῦ μυθολογίας τὸν μάρτυρα ### English translation (Claude) this man he had received the understanding of conversation with the gods! But let it be granted that he also heard other guides, though the writer nowhere indicates it. Which of them, then, professed himself to know, as having learned it from Pythagoras, and to teach others, the understanding and frequenting of the conversations of the gods, seen and unseen? Not even the renowned Plato, who more than anyone shared in the philosophy of Pythagoras, nor Archytas, nor Philolaus himself, who handed down in writing the discourses of Pythagoras, nor any others who became the man's disciples and handed down his opinions and maxims in writing to those after him, boasted of any such wisdom. So he learned such things from elsewhere and not from Pythagoras, and assumes the name of philosopher as a pretext for his solemn talk; and so that one might grant, most unreasonably, that the falsehood was true, he says, I know not how, that he learned these things from the Samian himself, who had departed from among men countless years before. Besides the Arabs, then, this man too must be enrolled as his teacher in the so-called secret knowledge about the gods. If, then, he was of a divine nature, the account has lied about his teachers; and if this is true, the myth was false, and the writing that he was divine is not true. I am not yet minded to busy myself with the apparition of Proteus and to demand proof of it, nor proofs of the swans with him, which he absurdly reports acted as midwives to his mother when she bore him. Nor do I demand a witness for the tale about the thunderbolt; ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 1.4–5 (Proteus, the swans, the thunderbolt at his birth). ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 380 (Kayser 1:380; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/380). ## Kayser p. 381 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/369/#p-381 - Source: Kayser 1:381 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius is willing to accept the credible human traits of Apollonius, his family, sensible cures, temperance and Pythagorean silence. ### Greek text παρέχειν ἀξιῶ, οὐ γὰρ δὴ καὶ τούτων, ὡς ἔφην, Ζ4άμὲς ἡμῖν συνίστωρ ἀφίξεται. μακρῷ ὕστερον ἐν Νένῳ τῆς ᾿ἀσσυρίας τἀνδρὶ συνάψας. ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν εὖ μάλα προθύμως τοῖς εἰχόσι τε καὶ ἀληθείας ἐχομένοις πειθόμενος, εἰ καὶ μείζονά τινα καθ' ὑπερ- βολὴν ἐς ἔπαινον ἀνδρὸς ἀγαθοῦ λέγοιτ᾽ ἄν, πιστὰ καὶ παραδεκχτέα εἶναί μοι δοκῶ, ὅτι μὴ μόνα τὰ τερατώδη καὶ λήρου πλέα. οὔκουν φθονοίην. εἴ φησιν ὁ συγγραφεὺς γένος τε ἀρχαῖον καὶ τῶν οἰκιστῶν ἀνημμένον τῷ ἀνδρὶ γεγονέναι καὶ πλουτῶν εἰ οὔ- τως ἔτυχεν ὑπὲρ τοὺς ἐγχωρίους ἅπαντας διδασκάλῶν τε νέον ὄντα οὐ μόνον τῶν δεδηλωμένων τυχεῖν, ἀλλ᾽, εἰ δοκεῖ, καὶ τούτων αὐτὸν διδάσκαλον καὶ καθηγητὴν γεγονέναι. ἔστω δ᾽ ἐπὶ τούτοις ἐντρεχὴς καὶ τὰ κοινά, ὡς τὸν εἰς ᾿Δἀσκληπιοῦ θέρα- πείας χάριν ἀφιγμένον διὰ γνώμης ἀρίστης ἀπαλλάξαι τῆς ἀρρωστίας, νοσοῦντι γὰρ δὴ ὑδέρου πάθει κατάλληλον ἐγκρατείας ὑποθέσθαι δίαιταν τῷ κάἱνοντι καὶ ταύτῃ αὐτὸν ὑγιᾶ καταστῆσαι καὶ τούτῳ. γὲ τῆς φρονήσεως ἀποδεκτὸν τὸ μειράκιον, καὶ ὡς τὸν πολυτελῶς θύειν παρεσκευασμένον εἶρξεν οἷα εἰκὸς ἐπὶ κακίᾳ διαβεβοημένον. καὶ γὰρ δὴ τῶν ἐγχωρέων ἁπάντων πλουσιώτατόν τε καὶ περιφανέστατον αὐτὸν ὑποτίθεται. καὶ ἐν σώφροσι δ᾽ αὐτὸν φθόνος οὐδεὶς ἐγγράφειν, ὅτι τε πρὸς τὸν ἐραστὴν πειρώ-- μενον αὐτοῦ τῆς ὥρας διελοιδορήσατο καὶ γυναικείας ὅτι χκαθαρὸν ἑαυτὸν μίξεως διὰ τέλους, ὡς ὁ λόγος φησίν, ἤγαγε. πιστὰ δ᾽ ἔστω καὶ τὰ τῆς πενταετοῦς χατὰ Πυθαγόραν σιωπῆς αὐτοῦ, καὶ τά, ὅπως ταύ- ᾿ τὴν διήνυσεν, ἐπαίνου ἄξια. ταῦτα δὴ καὶ ὅσα τοι- αὗτα ἀνθρώπινα καὶ ὡς ἀληθῶς φιλοσοφίας καὶ ἀληθείας οὐ πόρρω δεχοίμην ἂν περὶ πολλοῦ τὸ ### English translation (Claude) for, as I said, Damis will not come to us as witness of these things either, since he joined the man much later, at Ninus in Assyria. For my part, I very readily believe what is likely and keeps to the truth, and even if things somewhat greater are said by exaggeration in praise of a good man, I think them credible and acceptable, provided they are not merely marvellous and full of nonsense. So I would not grudge it if the writer says that the man was of an ancient family going back to the founders of the city, and wealthy, if so it was, beyond all the natives; and that as a young man he not only had the teachers mentioned but, if you like, became the teacher and guide even of them. Let him also be clever in common matters, as when by excellent judgment he freed from his illness a man who had come to the temple of Asclepius for treatment: for to one sick with dropsy he prescribed a suitable diet of self-control, and so restored him to health; and on this score the youth is to be approved for his good sense. So too when he kept away from the temple one who was prepared to sacrifice lavishly, a man, it seems, notorious for wickedness; for he represents him as the richest and most prominent of all the natives. Nor do I grudge enrolling him among the temperate, because he reviled the lover who made an attempt on his youthful beauty, and because, as the account says, he kept himself pure of intercourse with women to the end. Let what is told of his five years' silence after the manner of Pythagoras be credible too, and the way he completed it worthy of praise. These and similar things, human and truly not far from philosophy and truth, I would gladly accept. But ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 1.4, 1.9–10, 1.13–14, 1.19. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 381 (Kayser 1:381; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/381). ## Kayser p. 382 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/369/#p-382 - Source: Kayser 1:382 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius points out that Apollonius allowed Damis to eat meat contrary to Pythagoras, and that he who understood all languages needed an interpreter in India. ### Greek text χρεῖττον ἀνθρώπου τὴν φύσιν ὑποτίθεσθαι καὶ παρὰ πόδας ἐναντιολογεῖν τῆς τε δοθείσης ἀμνημονεῖν ὑποθέσεως, ἔχειν ψόγον ἂν καὶ διαβολὴν αὐτῷ τε τῷ γράφοντι καὶ πολὺ πρότερον τῷ γραφομένῳ περιἄψειν ἡγοῦμαι. Καὶ ταῦτα μὲν ἀπὸ τοῦ πρώτου συγγράμματος. ἐπίωμεν δὲ καὶ τὰ ἐκ τοῦ δευτέρου. τὴν ἀπὸ Περσίδος ἐπ΄ ᾿Ινδοὺς πορείαν ἄγει παραλαβὼν αὐτὸν ὁ παράδοξον,] δαιμόνιόν τι, ὃ καὶ ἔμπουσαν ὀνομάζξει, τὸν ἀπελάσαι φησί, καὶ ξῴων δὲ εἰς τροφὴν αὐτοῖς προσαχθέντων εἰρηκέναι αὐτὸν τῷ ΖΙάμιδι, ὡς ἄρα συγχωροίη αὐτῷ τε καὶ τοῖς ἑταίροις σιτεῖσθαι τῶν χρεῶν, τὸ γὰρ ἀπέχεσθαι αὐτῶν αὐτοῖς μὲν εἰς οὐδὲν ὁρᾶν προβαῖνον, ἑαυτῷ δὲ εἰς ἃ ὡμολόγηται πρὸς φιλοσοφίαν ἐκ παιδός. καίτοι τίς οὐκ ἂν ἀπορήσειεν, ὅτι μηδ᾽ αὐτόν. ὃν μόνον ἐδόκει τοῦ βίου ξηλωτὴν κεκτῆσθαι καὶ προὔτρεπεν ἐπὶ φιλοσοφίαν, εἶργεν οἷα φίλτατον τῆς τῶν ἐμψύχων, ὡς ἂν οὐχ ὁσίας κατὰ Πυθαγόραν τροφῆς; ὁ δ᾽ οὐκ᾽ οἶδ᾽ ὁποίῳ λόγῳ λέγων μὲν οὐ συνοίσειν ἑαυτῷ, κείνοις δ᾽ οὐδὲν ὁρᾶν ἀπὸ τῆς ἀποχῆς προβαῖνον ὡμολόγει; ἐπὶ ο" τούτοις ὁ Φιλόστρατος ὁ τἀληθὲς τιμᾶν πρὸς τοῦ Φιλαλήθους μεμαρτυρημένος, ὅρα τῆς ἀληθείας ὁποῖα δείγματα παρίστησι᾽ γενόμενον παρ᾽ Ἰνδοῖς τὸν ᾿Ζἀπολλώνιον παραστήσασθαί φησιν ἑρμηνέα καὶ δι᾽ αὐτοῦ προσδιαλέγεσθαι Φραώτῃ, τοῦτο δ᾽ εἶναι τῷ βασιλεῖ τῶν Ἰνδῶν ὄνομα, καὶ ὁ μικρῷ πρόσθεν κατ᾽ αὐτὸν πασῶν γλωσσῶν συνεὶς νῦν αὖ κατὰ τὸν αὐτὸν ἑρμηνέως δεῖται. καὶ πάλιν ὁ (τὰ) κατὰ διάνοιαν ### English translation (Claude) to suppose him better than a man in nature and then at once contradict it and forget the assumption made, I think would bring blame and discredit on the writer himself and much earlier on the one written about. So much from the first book; let us go on to what is in the second. The writer leads him on the journey from Persia to India, … a marvel, some spirit, which he also calls an empusa, which he says Apollonius drove away. And when animals were brought to them for food, he says that he told Damis that he allowed him and his companions to eat the meat, since abstaining from it would lead them to nothing, while for himself it led to what he had professed toward philosophy from childhood. Yet who would not be puzzled that he did not keep even the one man whom he seemed to have as the only imitator of his life, and whom he urged to philosophy, from animal food as from food unholy according to Pythagoras, as one dearest to him? And by what reasoning did he say that it would not profit himself, but admit that for them nothing would come of abstaining? Besides this, see what proofs of truthfulness Philostratus presents, who the Lover of Truth testifies honoured the truth. He says that when Apollonius was among the Indians he engaged an interpreter and through him conversed with Phraotes (this was the name of the king of the Indians); and he who a little before, according to him, understood all languages, now again, according to the same writer, needs an interpreter. And again he who knows what men have in mind ### Translation notes - A line is lost in the OCR before “a marvel, some spirit”; marked “…”. Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 2.4 (the empusa), 2.7 (meat), 2.26 (interpreter with Phraotes). ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 382 (Kayser 1:382; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/382). ## Kayser p. 383 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/369/#p-383 - Source: Kayser 1:383 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius mocks Apollonius, who knew men's thoughts yet needed an interpreter and was surprised that the Indian king spoke Greek, and begins to discuss his judgment about a found treasure. ### Greek text ἀνθρώπων εἰδὼς καὶ μόνον οὐχὶ κατὰ τὸν παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς θεὸν δι᾿ ἑρμηνέως ἀνερωτᾷ, ὁποία τις εἴη τῷ βασιλεῖ δίαιτα, ἡγεμόνα τε ἀξιοῖ τῆς ἐς Βραχμᾶνας πορείας ὃ γενέσθαι τινὰ αὐτῷ. καὶ μεταξὺ ὁ μὲν τῶν Ἰνδῶν βασιλεὺς καὶ ταῦτα βάρβαρος ὧν τὴν φύσιν τὸν ἕρ- [43 μηνέαι ἐκποδὼν μεταστησάμενος ᾿Ελλάδι χρῆται πρὸς αὐτὸν τῇ ομιλέᾳ παιδείαν καὶ πολυμάθειαν ἐνδειαὐτοῖς οὐκ ἀμαθῶς ἔχοι φωνῆς δέον ἐπεφιλοτιμήἰὅ σατο, ἀλλὰ καὶ λαλοῦντος Ἑλλάδι γλώσσῃ τοῦ Ἶνὡς ἔοικεν, ἑαυτῷ γράφων. πῶς γὰρ ἂν ἐξεπλάγη μὴ οὐχὶ βάρβαρον οἰηθείς; καὶ τὸν τοιοῦτον θαυ- μάσας οὔποτ᾽ ἂν ἑλληνίσαι προσεδόκησεν᾽ εἶθ'., ὥσπερ τι παραδόντα παράδοξον καταπλαγεὶς καὶ τὸ τούτου ἔτ᾽ ἀγνοῶν αἴτιον..εἰπέ μοι’ ἔφη ὁ ᾽4πολλώνιος..ὦ βασιλεῦ, πόθεν οὕτως ἔχεις φωνῆς Ἔλλάδος; φιλοσοφία τε ἡ περὶ σὲ πόθεν ἐνταῦθα:; οὐδὲ γὰρ ἐς διδασκάλους γε, οἶμαι, ἀναφέρεις, ἐπεὶ μηδὲ εἶναι Ἰνδοῖς (εἰκὸς) διδασκάλους τούτου.“ αὗται αἱ παράδοξοι τοῦ πάντα προγνώσει διειληφότος φωσκάλους καὶ οἵτινες οὗτοι ἕκαστά τε πατρόθεν τῶν Ἰνδοῦ δικάξοντος περὶ θησαυροῦ φωραθέντος ἐν" ἀγρῷ, πότερα τῷ πριαμένῳ ἢ τῷ τὸ χωρίον ἀποδομένῳ δέοι νεῖμαι τοῦτον, ὁ πάντα φιλόσοφος καὶ θεοῖς κεχαρισμένος ἐρωτηθεὶς ἐπικρίνει τῷ πρια- μένῳ, λογισμὸν δὴ αὐτοῖς ῥήμασιν ἐπειπὼν..ὡς οὐκ ### English translation (Claude) and all but that of the god among them asks through an interpreter what way of life the king follows, and asks that someone be given him as guide on the journey to the Brahmans. Meanwhile the king of the Indians, a barbarian by nature, sends the interpreter out of the way and converses with him in Greek … [The writer has Apollonius] amazed at his education and learning … and at his speaking the Greek tongue, writing, it seems, to suit himself. For how would he have been astonished unless he thought him a barbarian? Admiring such a man, he would never have expected him to speak Greek. Then, as though the king had shown him some marvel, astonished and still ignorant of its cause, “Tell me, O king,” said Apollonius, “where did you get such command of the Greek tongue, and where did the philosophy about you come from here? For I do not suppose you refer it to teachers, since it is not likely that the Indians have teachers of this.” Such are the strange questions of the man who comprehends everything by foreknowledge! … [The king tells him of his] teachers, who they were, and each detail of his family. When the king of the Indians was judging a case about a treasure found in a field, whether it should be assigned to the buyer or to the one who had sold the land, the all-wise philosopher, dear to the gods, being asked, decided for the buyer, adding as his reasoning, in his very words, “that he was not ### Translation notes - Several lines are scrambled in the OCR of this page (the Indian king's Greek and his account of his teachers); the sense is given and the gaps marked “…”. Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 2.27, 2.29, 2.31 (quoted), 2.39. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 383 (Kayser 1:383; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/383). ## Kayser p. 384 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/369/#p-384 - Source: Kayser 1:384 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius shows that Apollonius's judgment makes wealth the sign of divine favour, and turns to Philostratus's marvels of the Brahmans in the third book. ### Greek text φαῦλος ἦν, τῷ δ᾽ αὖ καὶ τὰ ὑπὸ γὴν δοῦναι, εἰ μὴ. βελτίων ἣν τοῦ ἀποδομένου ““ ὡς κατ᾽ αὐτὸν δὴ συνάγεσθαι, τοὺς μὲν εὐπόρους καὶ πλούτῳ διαφέροντας. κἂν αἰσχρότατοι. καὶ πανωλέστατοι τυγχά- νοιδν, τρισευδαίμονας καὶ θεοφιλεῖς ἡγεῖσθαι, μόνους δ᾽ ἄρα κακοδαίμονας τε καὶ ἀθλίους τοὺς πενεστάτους, κἂν Σωκράτης, κἂν Ζιογένης, κἂν αὐτὸς ἐκεῖ-νὸς Πυθαγόρας τυγχάνῃ, κἂν ἄλλος, οἵ πάντων ἀνδοῶν: σωφρονέστατοι τε καὶ ἐπιεικέστατοι. εἴποι γὰρ ἄν τις ἑπόμενος τῷ λόγῳ μὴ ἂν κατ᾽ αὐτὸν τοὺς θεοὺς τοὺς μὲν πένητας. τούτους δὴ αὐτούς. οἵ κατὰ φιλοσοφίαν διήνεγκαν, ἀφελέσθαι καὶ τὰ πρὸς τὴν ἀναγκαίαν τροφὴν μὴ οὐχὶ πάντως φαύλους ὄντας τὸν τρόπον, τοῖς δὲ τὸ ἦθος ἀκολαστοτέροις ἄφθονα τ καὶ τὰ μὴ ἀναγκαῖα παρασχεῖν, δἰ μὴ βελτίους ἐτύγχανον τῶν προτέρων, ἐξ ὧν παντί τῷ καταφανὴς ἡ τοῦ συμπεφάσματος ἀτοπία. Ταῦτα καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ δευτέρου παραθέμενοι ἴωμεν ἐπὶ τὸ τρίτον τὰ κατὰ τοὺς βεβοημένους ἐποψόμενοι Βραχμᾶνας ἔνθα δὴ τὰ ὑπὲρ Θούλην ἄπιστα καὶ εἴ τί περ ἄλλο τερατῶδές ποτε μυθολόγοις τισὶν ἀναπέπλασται, εὖ μάλα πιστὰ καὶ ἀληθέστατα, ὡς ἐν παραθέσει τούτων, ἀναφανήσεται, οἷς καὶ τὸν νοῦν ἐπιστῆσαι ἄξιον τῆς τοῦ Φιλαλήθους ἕνεκεν αὐὖὐθα- δείας ἡμῖν μὲν εὐχέρειαν καὶ κουφότητα τρόπον περιάπτοντος, αὑτῷ δὲ καὶ τοῖς αὐτῷ παφαπλησίοις τὴν ἀκριβῆ καὶ βεβαίαν μετὰ συνέσεως πρίσιν. ὅρα γοῦν, ἐφ᾽ οἷς σεμνύνεται παραδόξοις τῶν ἡμετέρων θείων εὐαγγελιστῶν προχρίνων τὸν Φιλόστρατον, ὡς μὴ μόνον παιδείας ἐπὶ πλεῖστον ἥκοντα, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἀληθείας ἐπιμεμελημένον. πρῶτα μὲν οὖν ἐν τῇ πρὸς τοὺς Βραχμᾶνας πορείᾳ τοῦ ᾿Απολλωνίου γυνή ### English translation (Claude) a bad man, and the gods would not have given him even what was under the ground, if he had not been better than the seller.” So, according to him, it follows that we must consider the well-off and those distinguished by wealth, even if they are most shameful and utterly depraved, thrice happy and dear to the gods, and only the poorest wretched and miserable, even if they were Socrates, or Diogenes, or Pythagoras himself, or another of the most temperate and fair-minded of all men. For anyone following the argument might say that according to him the gods would not take from the poor, the very men who excelled in philosophy, even what they need for necessary food unless they were altogether bad in character, and would not give abundance even of unnecessary things to men of more licentious character unless they were better than the former; from which the absurdity of the conclusion is plain to everyone. Having set out these things from the second book too, let us go on to the third, to look at what concerns the celebrated Brahmans. There the incredible tales of what lies beyond Thule, and any other marvel ever invented by tellers of fables, will appear very credible and most true in comparison with these. They deserve attention because of the arrogance of the Lover of Truth, who fastens credulity and a light character on us, and on himself and those like him an accurate, firm and intelligent judgment. See, then, in what marvels he takes pride when he prefers Philostratus to our divine evangelists, as one who not only reached the highest point of education but also cared for the truth. First, on Apollonius's journey to the Brahmans, a woman is introduced ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 2.39 (quoted). “The incredible tales beyond Thule” recalls Antonius Diogenes's novel. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 384 (Kayser 1:384; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/384). ## Kayser p. 385 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/369/#p-385 - Source: Kayser 1:385 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius recounts the marvels on the way to the Brahmans and the throne of Iarchas, mocking them as fables. ### Greek text τις αὐτῷ τὴν χροιὰν εἰσάγεται ἀπὸ τῆς κεφαλῆς ἐς ὀσφὺν λευκοτάτη, τὸ δὲ ἕτερον μέρος τοῦ σώματος μέλαινα. τὰ δὲ προϊόντων τῆς ἐπὶ τοὺς Βραχμᾶνας ὁδοῦ ὄρη καταπεφυτευμένα τὸ πέπερι καὶ τούτου πίθηκοι γεωργοὶ καὶ παράδοξοέτινες τὸ μέγεθος δρά- κοντες; ὧν ἀπὸ κεφαλῆς λαμπάδες ἀπορριπτοῦνται πυρός, οὗς εἴ τις ἀνέλοι, εὕροι ἄν, φησι, παραδόξους λίθους ἕν ταῖς κεφαλαῖς τῷ τοῦ Γύγου τοῦ παρὰ τῷ Πλάτωνι παραπλησίους. καὶ ταῦτα μὲν τὰ πρὸ τοῦ τῶν Βραχμάνων λόφου. ὡς δὲ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ἀφίκοντο, σανδαράκινον ἐνταῦθα φρέαρ ὕδατος ἰδεῖν παραδόξου καὶ κρατῆρα πλησίον πυρός, οὗ φλόγα ἀναπέμπεσθαν μολιβδώδη, δύο τὲ πίθους λίθου μέλανος τὸν μὲν ὄμβρων, τὸν δὲ ἀνέμων, ἀφ᾽ ὧν τοὺς Βραχμᾶνας, οἷς ἂν εἶεν τῆς χώρας ἵλεῳ. χορηγεῖν. ἀλλά γε καὶ ἀγάλματα παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς ᾿4θηνᾶς Πολιάδος χαὶ ᾿ἀπόλλωνος Πυθέου καὶ Διονύσου Διμναίου, καὶ ἄλλων τινῶν Ἑλληνικῶν θεῶν, ᾿ἸΙάρχαν δὲ τὸν ἐπὶ πάντων διδάσκαλον καλεῖσθαι. ὃν καὶ ἰδεῖν καθεξό-μενον πολλοῦ γὲ δεῖ φιλοσοφικῷ. σατραπικῷ δ᾽ ἂν μάλλον σχήματι ἐφ᾽ ὑψηλοτάτου δίφρου. χαλκοῦ δὲ μέλανος οὗτος ἠν καὶ πεποίκιλτο χφυσέοις ἀγάλμασιν, οἷα δὴ εἰκὸς τεχνουργῶν βαναύσων τρόπον πυρὶ καὶ σιδήρῳ μοχθοῦντας τοὺς φιλοσόφους τεχνουργεῖν, ἢ καὶ θαυματοποιῶν δίκην αὐτόματον ἀποτελεῖν τὸ δημιούργημα, οἱ δὲ τῶν ἄλλων τῶν μετ᾽ αὐτὸν διδασκάλων δίφροι χαλκοῖ μέν, φησιν. ἄσημοι δ᾽ ἦσαν καὶ ἧττον ὑψηλοί. ἔδει γάρ που πάντως τυράννου σχήματι προνομίας τῆς ἐν ἀγάλμασι καὶ χρυσῷ τὸν τῆς θείας φιλοσοφίας ἀξιοῦσθαι διδάσκαλον. πρῶ-- τὸν δὲ τὸν Ἰάρχαν ἰδόντα φησὶ τὸν ᾿Ζπολλώνιον ἐξ ὀνόματός τὸ προσειπεῖν Ἑλλάδι τῇ φωνῇ καὶ ἣν ### English translation (Claude) whose colour from the head to the waist is perfectly white, and the other part of the body black. Then, as they go on along the road to the Brahmans, there are mountains planted with pepper, with apes as its farmers, and serpents of marvellous size, from whose heads torches of fire are thrown, and if one killed them, he says, one would find in their heads marvellous stones like that of Gyges in Plato. So much before the hill of the Brahmans. When they came to it, they saw there a well of red water of marvellous kind, and near it a crater of fire from which a leaden flame was sent up, and two jars of black stone, one of rains and the other of winds, from which the Brahmans supply whatever part of the country they are well disposed to. And there were statues among them of Athena Polias, Pythian Apollo, Dionysus of the Marshes, and some other Greek gods; and Iarchas was called the teacher over all. He saw him seated, far from in a philosopher's manner, but rather in a satrap's, on a very high throne. It was of black bronze and adorned with golden figures, as though the philosophers, like common craftsmen, laboured with fire and iron to make such things, or else, like wonder-workers, produced the work automatically. The thrones of the other teachers after him were of bronze, he says, but plain and less high. For surely the teacher of divine philosophy had to be honoured in the manner of a tyrant with the privilege of figures and gold! He says that Iarchas, on first seeing Apollonius, addressed him by name in the Greek tongue, and asked for the letter ### Extrabiblical texts - Plato, Resp. 2.359d–360b (Plato (works)): allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 3.3–4, 3.8, 3.14–16. The ring of Gyges: Plato, Resp. 2.359d–360b. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 385 (Kayser 1:385; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/385). ## Kayser p. 386 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/386/#p-386 - Source: Kayser 1:386 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius recounts Iarchas's display of foreknowledge and the Brahmans' levitation, self-moving tripods and bronze cupbearers, which Hierocles believes. ### Greek text αὐτῷ παρὰ Φραώτου κομίζοι; ἐπιστολήν αἰτῆσαι κατὰ πρόγνωσιν ἤδη τοῦτο προειληφότα ἐνδείξασθαΐξ τὲ τὸ ἔνθεον τῆς προγνώσεως προειρηκότα, ὡς ἄρα ἑνὶ γράμματι τῷ δέλτα λείποι ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ἄρξασθαί τὲ ἀπειροκάλως εὐθὺς ἀπὸ πρώτης ὁμιλίας ἀπειροπλούτου δίχην ἐνεπιδείκνυσθαι τὸ τῆς προγνώσεως πλεο-νέκτημα πατέρα καὶ μητέρα καταλέγοντα τοῦ ᾿4πολ-᾿ λωνίου γένος τε καὶ τροφὴν καὶ παιδείαν καὶ τὰς χατὰ ἢ χρόνους ἀποδημίας καὶ τὴν εἰς αὐτὸν πορείαν καὺ τὰ κατ᾽ αὐτὴν πεπραγμένα τε αὐτῷ καὶ ὠμιλημένα. εἶτα δέ φησιν αὐτὸς οὗτος ὁ θαυμάσιος συγγραφεὺς τοὺς Βραχμᾶνας ἅμα τῷ ᾿ἀπολλωνίῳ χρισαμένους ἠλεκτρίνῳ φαρμάκῳ λούσασθαι καὶ περιστάντας ὡς ἐν χορῷ τὴν γῆν τύψαι ταῖς βάβδοις, τὴν δὲ κυρτωθεῖσαν ἀναπέμψαι αὐτοὺς εἰς δίπηχυ τοῦ ἀέρος. ἑστάναι τε αὐτοὺς μετεώρους ἐν αὐτῷ ἀέρι ἐπί τι χρόνου διάστημα, ἕλκειν δὲ καὶ πῦρ ἀπὸ τοῦ ἡλίου, ὅτε βούλοιντο, αὐτομάτως. τούτοις δ᾽ ἐπιφέρει παράδοξον ὁ θαυματολόγος, ὡς ἄρα τρίπο- δὲς Πυθικοὶ τέτταρες ἐξεκυκλήθησαν αὐτόματοι φοιτῶντες. καὶ εἰκάξει δὴ οὖν αὐτοὺς τοῖς Ὁμηρείοις οἰνοχόους τε ἐπὶ τούτοις ἐκ χαλκοῦ διακόνους τὴν ὕλην ἵστησι τέτταρας. ἐπιλέγει δέ, ὡς ἄρα καὶ ἡ γῆ αὐτομάτως ὑπεστόρνυτο αὐτοῖς πόας. τῶν δὲ τριπό- δῶν οἱ μὲν δύο, φησίν, οἴνου ἀπέρρεον, οἱ δὲ ἕτεροι δύο ὁ μὲν ὕδατος θερμοῦ κρᾶσιν παρεῖχεν, ὁ δ᾽ αὖ ψυχροῦ. τοὺς δὲ οἰνοχόους τοὺς χαλκοῦς ἀρύεσθαι εὐμέτρως τοῦ τε οἴνου καὶ τοῦ ὕδατος, περιελαύνειν τε κύκλῳ τὰς κύλικας, ὥσπερ ἐν τοῖς πότοις. ταῦτα Ἱεροκλεῖ τὰ ἀνωτάτω καὶ καθόλου δικαστήρια πεπιστευμένῳ μετὰ πόλλῆς ἀνετάσεως ἀληθῆ καὶ πιστὰ εἶναι δοκεῖ καὶ ἡμῶν μὲν εὐχέρεια καὶ κουφότης ### English translation (Claude) which he was bringing from Phraotes, having already grasped this by foreknowledge, and showed the divine character of his foreknowledge by saying beforehand that the letter lacked one letter, a delta; and that, tastelessly, from their very first conversation, like a nouveau riche, he showed off the advantage of foreknowledge, listing Apollonius's father and mother, his family, upbringing and education, his journeys at various times, his journey to them, and what he had done and said on it. Then this wonderful writer himself says that the Brahmans, together with Apollonius, anointed themselves with an amber-coloured drug and bathed, and standing round as in a chorus struck the earth with their rods; and the earth, arching up, sent them two cubits into the air, and they stood aloft in the air itself for some interval of time; and they drew fire from the sun, when they wished, of its own accord. To this the teller of marvels adds a wonder: four Pythian tripods rolled out moving of themselves; he compares them to Homer's, and besides these sets four cupbearers made of bronze. He adds that the earth too spread grass under them of its own accord. Two of the tripods, he says, flowed with wine, and of the other two, one supplied a mixture of hot water, the other of cold; and the bronze cupbearers drew of the wine and the water in due measure and carried the cups round in a circle, as at drinking parties. These things seem true and credible, after much examination, to Hierocles, who has been entrusted with the highest courts and those over all; and our credulity and levity ### Extrabiblical texts - Homer, Il. 18.373–377 (Homer, Iliad): allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 3.16–17, 3.27. Homer's self-moving tripods: Il. 18.373–377. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 386 (Kayser 1:386; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/386). ## Kayser p. 387 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/386/#p-387 - Source: Kayser 1:387 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius mocks the drunken Indian king at the Brahmans' banquet, Iarchas's claim that they are gods, and their talk of former lives. ### Greek text πλείστη ὅση κατέγνωσται παρ᾽ αὐτῷ, αὐτὸς δὲ τοι- αὔτα Φιλοστράτῳ πιστεύων αὐτοῖς δὴ ῥήμασι σεμνύνεται λέγων;.ἐπισχεψώμεθά γε μήν. ὅσῳ βέλτιον καὶ ᾿ς συνετώτερον ἡμεῖς ἐχδεχόμεθα τὰ τοιαῦτα, καὶ ἣν περὶ τῶν ἐναρέτων ἀνδρῶν ἔχομεν γνώμην.“ ἐπὶ τοιούτῳ δὴ τῷ συμποσίῳ κατὰ τὸν αὐτὸν Φιλόστρατον βασιλεὺς ἐγχωριάξων Ἰνδοῖς εἰσάγεται συμπένων τοῖς φιλοσόφοις. τοῦτον δὲ ἐνυβρίζειν καὶ ἐμπαροινεῦν φιλοσοφίᾳ μεθύυσκεσθαί τε παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς καὶ ἀντιπαρεξάγειν Ἡλίῳ καὶ ἀλαξονεύεσθαι ἱστορεῖ, τὸ καὶ πάλιν τὸν ᾿Ζπολλώνιον δι᾽ ἑρμηνέως τὰ παρὰ τούτου μανθάνειν καὶ αὖ πάλιν πρὸς αὐτὸν διαλέγεσθαι ὑφερμηνεύοντος τοῦ Ἰάρχα᾽ καὶ πῶς οὐ θαυμάξειν ἄξιον, ὅπως τὸν οὕτως ὑβριστὴν καὶ ἀτοπώτατον παροινεῖν καὶ μεθύσκεσθαι παρὰ τηλικούτοις τὸ εἰκὸς ἦν, ὃν οὐδὲ παρεῖναι ἄξιον ἐν φιλοσόφων μή τί γε καὶ ἰσοθέων ἑστίᾳ; τί δέ μοι ἰσοθέους τούτους καλεῖν καὶ τῆς ἀξίας ἢ ἐνυβρίξειν τοὺς ἄνδρας; ὁπότε πυθομένου τοῦ ᾿Απολλωνίου, τένως ἑαυτοὺς ἡγοῦνται, θεοὺς ἔφη ὁ Ἰάρχας, ὃς καὶ τοῖς συμπόταις, οἷα τὸ δὴ θεὸς φιλοσόφου μὲν ἥκιστα τρόπῳ. πολλοῦ γὲ δεῖ, μή τέ γε μᾶλλον, οὗ ἔφησε, θεοῦ ἀξίως, (ἐς) τὴν φιάλην ἐπικύπτων ἐξῆρχεν. ἡ δέ, φησιν ὁ συγγραφεύς. ὡς ἄρα ἐπότιξεν ἱκανῶς πάντας. (καὶ) ἐπεδίδου. χαθάπερ αἵ ἀπόρρητοι πηγαὶ τοῖς ἀνιμωμένοις. μδτὰ ταῦτα κοιναὶ λόγων ὁμιλίαι καὶ σπουδαιολογέαι τῶν φιλοσόφων τοῦ μὲν ἸΙάρχα διδάσκοντος. ὡς ἄρα ποτὲ αὐτῷ ἡ ψυχὴ ἐν ἑτέρῳ ἀνθρώπου βασιλέως γένοιτο σώματι καὶ τοιαδί τινα αὐτῷ πεπραγμένα εἴη, τοῦ δὲ ᾿ἀπολλωνίου. ὡς νηὸς Δ4ἰγυπτίας ποτὲ γένοιτο κυβερνήτης. καὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα διαπράξαιτο, πεύσεις τὲ καὶ ἀποκρίσεις [ἑκάστου]. ὧν καὶ τῆς σοφίας ἄξιον ### English translation (Claude) he has condemned as very great; but he himself, believing such things from Philostratus, boasts, in his very words: “Let us consider how much better and more intelligently we take such things, and what opinion we hold of virtuous men.” At such a banquet, according to the same Philostratus, a king who ruled among the Indians is introduced drinking with the philosophers. He relates that this king insulted and behaved drunkenly toward philosophy, got drunk among them, set himself up against the Sun and boasted; and again that Apollonius learned what he said through an interpreter and again conversed with him with Iarchas interpreting. And is it not a wonder how it was fitting that one so insolent and absurd should behave drunkenly and get drunk among men of such stature, when he did not deserve to be present at a table of philosophers, let alone of men equal to gods? But why should I call them equal to gods and insult the men's dignity, when, as Apollonius asked whom they considered themselves to be, Iarchas said, “Gods”? He, as a god, began for the drinking companions, not at all like a philosopher, far from it, nor rather, as he said, worthily of a god, by stooping over the bowl; and the bowl, says the writer, gave all of them enough to drink and kept supplying it, like secret springs to those who draw from them. After this there were common conversations and serious discussions of the philosophers: Iarchas teaching that his soul had once been in the body of another man, a king, and had done such and such things, and Apollonius that he had once been the pilot of an Egyptian ship and had done such things; questions and answers whose wisdom it is worth not ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 3.18–19, 3.24–32. Kayser's square brackets around ἑκάστου (“of each”) mark a word he deletes; it is left out. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 387 (Kayser 1:387; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/387). ## Kayser p. 388 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/386/#p-388 - Source: Kayser 1:388 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius recounts Apollonius's questions to Iarchas about fabulous creatures and the Brahman's cures, ironically thanking the writer for discrediting his own tales. ### Greek text μηδαμῶς παρεκθέσθαι τὴν μνήμην. ἐρέσθαι δέ φησι τὸν ᾿ἀπολλώνιον, εἰ ἔστι παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς χρύσεον ὕδωρ -- ὦ τοῦ σοφοῦ καὶ παραδόξου πύσματος -- καὶ περὶ ἀνδρώπων δὲ ὑπὸ γῆν οἰκούντων καὶ υγμαίων ἄλλων καὶ σκιαπόδων ἀνερωτᾶν, καὶ εἰ γίγνοιτο παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς ξῷον τετράπουν, ὃ λέγεται μαρτιχόρα, ὃ τὴν κεφαλὴν ἀνθρώπῳ εἰκάσθαι ᾽ λέοντι δὲ ὡμοιῶσθαι τὸ μέγεθος, τὴν δὲ οὐρὰν ἐκφέρειν πηχυαίας καὶ ἀκανθώδεις τὰς τρίχας. ἃς βάλλειν ὥσπερ τοξεύματα ἐς τοὺς θηρῶντας, καὶ τοιαῦτα μὲν τὸν ᾿ἀπολλώνιον ἀνερωτᾶν. τὸν δὲ Ἰάρχαν διδάσκειν αὐτὸν περὶ μὲν τῶν Πυγμαίων., ὡς ἄρα εἶεν οἰκοῦντες μὲν ὑπόγειοι, διατρίβοντες δὲ ὑπὲρ τὸν Γάγγην ποταμὸν ξῶντες. περὶ δὲ τῶν ἄλλων, ὡς ἀνύπαρκτῳ εἴη. ἔριον ἐπὶ τούτοις φυόμενον αὐτοῖς ἀπὸ γῆς ἐς ἐσθῆτος ὕλην ὁ Φιλόστρατος ἀναγράφει, πάντως δήπου τῶν φιλοσόφων ἱστὸν ἐποιχομένων καὶ ταλασιουργίαις ἐς ἐσθῆτος κατεργασίαν ἐχπονουμένων --- οὐδὲ γὰρ ᾿εἰσῆκται παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς γυναικεῖον φῦλον --- εἰ μὴ καὶ τοῦτο φήσειεν αὐτόματον αὐτοῖς παραδόξως δὴ ἱερὰν ἐς ἐσθῆτα μεταφύεσθαι. φέρειν δ᾽ ἕκαστον αὐτῶν βάβδον καὶ δακτύλιον ἀπόρρητον ἔχοντα ἰσχύν. εἶτα παραδοξοποιίαι τοῦ Βραχμᾶνος, ὡς δαιμονῶντα δι᾽ ἐπιστολῆς ἀνακαλέσαιτο, ὡς χωλεξύοντα καταψήσας εὖ τὸν γλουτὸν θεραπεύσειεν, ὡς τυφλῷ τὸ βλέπειν καὶ ἀδρανεῖ τινι τὴν χεῖρα σῴαν χαρίζοιτο. πολλὰ - χἀγαθὰ γένοιτο πραγμάτων ἡμᾶς ἀπολύσαντι τῷ συγγραφεῖ" δῆλα γάρ, ὡς ἀληθῆ καὶ ταῦτα, ὅτε βροντὰς καὶ ἀνέμους ἔν πίθοις τρίποδάς τὲ ἐκ λέθου φοιτῶντας αὐτομάτως καὶ οἰνοχόους ἀπὸ χαλκοῦ περιελαύνειν ἐν κύκλῳ τὰς κύλικας προιστορήσας διὸ τῆς περὶ τούτων ὡς ἀληθῶν ἀφηγήσεως καὶ τῶν ὁ ### English translation (Claude) to omit from memory. He says that Apollonius asked whether they had golden water (what a wise and wonderful question!), and asked about men living under the earth, about Pygmies and Shadow-feet, and whether there was among them a four-footed animal called the martichoras, whose head is like a man's and its size like a lion's, and whose tail puts out hairs a cubit long and thorny, which it shoots like arrows at those who hunt it. Such were the questions of Apollonius; and Iarchas taught him that the Pygmies live underground, dwelling beyond the river Ganges, but that the other creatures do not exist. Besides this, Philostratus records that wool grows for them from the earth as material for clothing; so presumably the philosophers went to the loom and toiled at spinning to make their clothing (for no womankind had been admitted among them), unless he would say that this too, marvellously, turns of itself into holy clothing for them. Each of them, he says, carries a staff and a ring having a secret power. Then come the wonders of the Brahman: how he recalled a man possessed by a demon by a letter, how he cured a lame man by stroking his hip, how he gave sight to a blind man and a sound hand to a man whose hand was disabled. Many thanks to the writer for freeing us from trouble! For it is clear that these too are true, when he had related beforehand thunder and winds in jars, tripods of stone moving of themselves, and cupbearers of bronze carrying the cups round in a circle; for by narrating these as true he exposed and refuted the fable of all the ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 3.45–47, 3.15, 3.38–39. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 388 (Kayser 1:388; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/388). ## Kayser p. 389 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/386/#p-389 - Source: Kayser 1:389 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius exposes the contradiction between Apollonius's secret study with Iarchas, his rings of the stars, and Philostratus's claim that he did not imitate the Brahmans' wonders. ### Greek text λοιπῶν ἁπάντων ἐξέφηνέ τε καὶ διήλεγξε τὴν μυθο- λογέαν. εἰρηκέναι δέ φησιν ὁ Φιλόστρατος τὸν Ζ26μιν δέχα τῆς αὐτοῦ παρουσίας καὶ τῷ Ἰάρχᾳ συμφι-λοσοφῆσαι τὸν ᾿“πολλώνιον εἰληφέναι τὲ παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ δακτυλίους ἑπτὰ ἐπωνύμους ἀστέρων, οὗς καὶ φορεῖν αὐτὸν καθ' ἕνα πρὸς τὰ ὀνόματα τῶν ἡμερῶν. ταῦτα δὲ νῦν εἰπὼν ὁ τἀληθὲς τιμᾶν παρὰ τῷ Φιλαλήθει νενομισμένος μεθ᾽ ἕτερα τῆς γραφῆς. ὡς ἂν δὴ γοητείαν τῶν Βραχμάνων καταγνοὺς καὶ ταύ-της ἐλεύθερον καταστῆσαι τὸν ᾿ΔΑπολλώνιον φροντέ- σας ἐπιφέρει φάσκων κατὰ λέξιν..ἰδὼν δὲ παρὰ τοῖς ᾿Ινδοῖς τοὺς τρίποδας καὶ τοὺς οἰνοχόους καὶ ὅσα αὐτόματα ἐσφοιτᾶν εἶπον, οὔθ', ὅπως σοφίξοιντο αὐτά, ἤρετο, οὔτε ἐδοήθη μαθεῖν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπήνει μέν. ξηλοῦν δὲ οὐκ ἠξίου.“ καὶ πῶς, ὦ οὗτος, οὐκ ἠξίου; ὁ δίχα τοῦ “άμιδος σπουδὴν ποιούμενος συμφιλοσοφεῖν αὐτοῖς καὶ τὸν μόνον ἑταῖρον, ὅ τι καὶ πράττοι. λανθάνειν δέον ἡγούμενος; πῶς δὲ οὐκ ἠξίου ξηλοῦν ὁ τοὺς τῶν ἀστέρων ἐπωνύμους καταδεχόμενος δαχτυλίους καὶ τούτους ἀναγκαῖον τιθέμενος διὰ παντὸς τοῦ βίου φέρειν πρὸς τὰ ὀνόματα τῶν ἡμερῶν καίτοι γε ἀπόρρητον, ὡς φῇς αὐτός, ἔχον- τας ἰσχύν; εἰ δὲ καὶ δοθείη τὸ μὴ ξηλοῦν ἠξιωκέναι αὐτὸν ὡς μὴ εὖ πράττοντα. οὐκ ἐξήλου δηλονότι. πῶς οὖν ἐπήνει, ἐφ᾽ οἷς μὴ ἠξίου ξηλοῦν; εἰ δ᾽ ὡς θείως ἐνεργοῦντας ἐπήνει, πῶς οὐκ ἐξήλου τὰ ἐπαίνῶν ἄξια; ἀλλὰ γὰρ μετὰ τὴν παρὰ τούτοις διατριβὴν παλινοστοῦντα αὐτὸν ἅμα τοῖς ἑταίροις ἐληλυθέναι φησὶν ἐς τὴν τῶν ᾿θρειτῶν χώραν, ἔνθα χαλκαῖ μὲν αὐτοῖς αἷ πέτραι. χαλκὴ δὲ ἡ ψάμμος, χαλκοῦ δὲ ψῆγμα οἵ ποταμοὶ ἄγουσι. Καὶ τοσαῦτα μὲν τὰ κατὰ τὸ τρέτον σύγγραμμα, ### English translation (Claude) rest. Philostratus says that Damis said that Apollonius studied philosophy with Iarchas without him, and received from him seven rings named after the stars, which he wore one at a time according to the names of the days. Having said this now, the man thought by the Lover of Truth to honour the truth, later in his writing, as though condemning the sorcery of the Brahmans and taking care to set Apollonius free of it, adds, word for word: “When he saw among the Indians the tripods and the cupbearers and all that they said moved of itself, he did not ask how they contrived them, nor did he wish to learn, but he praised them without thinking it right to imitate them.” How, sir, did he not think it right, he who was eager to study philosophy with them without Damis, and thought it necessary that his only companion should not know what he was doing? How did he not think it right to imitate, he who accepted the rings named after the stars and made it a rule to wear them all his life according to the names of the days, though, as you say yourself, they had a secret power? And even if it be granted that he did not think it right to imitate them, as not doing well, he obviously did not imitate them; how then did he praise what he did not think right to imitate? And if he praised them as acting divinely, why did he not imitate what was worthy of praise? After his stay among them, he says, he returned with his companions and came to the land of the Oreitae, where the rocks are of bronze, the sand of bronze, and the rivers carry bronze dust. So much for the third book. ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 3.41, 3.43 (quoted), 3.55. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 389 (Kayser 1:389; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/389). ## Kayser p. 390 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/386/#p-390 - Source: Kayser 1:390 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius objects that Apollonius begins his wonders only after his foreign schooling, and turns to the sparrow, the plague at Ephesus, and its averting. ### Greek text ἐπίωμεν δ᾽ ἤδη καὶ τὰ ξξῆς. ἐπανελθόντα φησὶν ἀπὸ τῆς ᾿Ινδῶν χώρας ἐπὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα κοινωνὸν τῶν θεῶν πρὸς αὐτῶν τῶν θεῶν ἀνακεκηρῦχθαι, οὗ καὶ τοὺς κάμνοντας ὡς αὐτὸν ἐφ᾽ ὑγείᾳ παρέπεμπον, καὶ δῆτα ὡς ἐξ ᾿Δφάβων καὶ μάγων καὶ Ἰνδῶν παράδοξόν τινὰ καὶ θεῖον ἡμῖν αὐτὸν ἀγαγὼν παραδόξων ἐντεῦθεν ἀφηγημάτων κατάρχεται. καίτοι ἄν τις εἶποι εὐλόγως, ὅτι δὴ εἰ θειοτέρας ἢ κατ᾽ ἄνθρωπον φύσεως ἦν. πάλαι, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ νῦν ἔδει, πρὸ τῆς δὲ ὅτέρων μεταλήψεως τῶν θαυμασίων κατάρχεσθαι, περιττὴ δ᾽ ὧν καὶ ἡ ἐξ “ράβων αὐτῷ μάγων τε καὶ Ἰνδῶν διὰ σπουδῆς ἐπεχειρεῖτο πολυμάθεια, εἰ δή τις κατὰ τὴν δοθεῖσαν ὑπῆρξεν ὑπόθεσιν᾽ ἀλλ᾽ οὗτός γε κατὰ τὸν φιλαλήθη συγγραφέα νῦν δὴ πάρεστι τὸ μετὰ τοσούτους διδασκάλους τὴν σοφίαν ἐνεπιδεικνύμενος, καὶ πρῶτα μὲν οἷα ἐξ ᾿άράβων καὶ τῆς παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς οἰωνιστικῆς ὁρμώμενος τὸν στρουθόν, ὅ τι καὶ βούλοιτο τοὺς ἑτέρους ἐπὶ “τροφὴν πάρακαλῶν ἐφερμηνεύει τοῖς παροῦσιν, εἶτα δὲ᾽ λοιμοῦ (ἐν Εφέσῳ) προαισθόμενος προμαντεύεται τοῖς πολίταις. τὴν δ᾽ αἰτίαν καὶ τούτου ἐν τῇ πρὸς “Ιομετιανὸν ἀπολογίᾳ αὐτὸς παρατίθεται. ἐρομένου γάρ τοι αὐὖτόν, ὁπόθεν ὁρμώμενος τοῦτο προείποι,..λεπτοτέρας" ἔφη «χρώμενος, ὦ βασιλεῦ. διαίτῃ πρῶτος τοῦ δει- νοῦ ῃσθόμην.““ καὶ τρίτον δ᾽ αὐτοῦ θαῦμα γεγονὸς ἱστορεῖ, ὡς δὴ ἀλεξήσαντος τὸν λοιμόν, ὅπερ εἰ καὶ τὰ μάλιστα ἐν ταῖς ἐπὶ τέλει κατ᾽ αὐτοῦ κατηγορίαις οὐ τέθεικεν ὁ συγγραφεύς, ὅτι μὴ παρῆν, ὡς εἰκός, αὐτῷ δι᾽ ἀπολογίας ἀπολύσασθαι τὸ ἔγκλημα, φέρε δ᾽ οὖν ὅμως αὐτοὶ τὴν ἱστορίαν ἐς φανερὸν ὑποθώμεθα, οὕτω δὴ καὶ ταύτην εὐθύνοντες. εἴ τινι γὰρ οὐκ [ἂν] εἴη σαφές, ὅτι δὴ πολὺ τὸ πλάσμα καὶ ### English translation (Claude) Let us now go on to what follows. He says that when Apollonius returned from India to Greece he was proclaimed by the gods themselves a partner of the gods, so that they sent the sick to him for healing; and so, having brought him to us as something marvellous and divine from the Arabs, the Magi and the Indians, he begins from here his marvellous narratives. Yet one might reasonably say that if he was of a nature more divine than man's, he should have begun his wonders long before, not now, before he received anything from others; and the learning he eagerly sought from the Arabs, the Magi and the Indians was superfluous, if he really was what was assumed. But according to the truth-loving writer he now comes forward, after so many teachers, to show his wisdom. First, as one setting out from the Arabs and their augury, he interprets to those present what the sparrow meant in calling the others to food; then, having perceived beforehand a plague at Ephesus, he foretells it to the citizens. He himself gives the cause of this in his defence before Domitian: when the emperor asked him from what he had foretold it, he said, “Using a lighter diet, O king, I was the first to perceive the danger.” He relates a third wonder of his, that he averted the plague. Even though the writer did not put this among the charges against him at the end, because, it seems, he could not clear himself of the charge by a defence, let us nevertheless put the story in plain view ourselves and hold it too to account. For if it were not clear to anyone that the fiction is great and ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 4.1, 4.3–4, 8.7.9 (quoted), 4.10. Kayser's square brackets around ἄν mark a word he deletes; it is left out. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 390 (Kayser 1:390; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/390). ## Kayser p. 391 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/386/#p-391 - Source: Kayser 1:391 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius ridicules the story of the plague of Ephesus as an old beggar turned dog, arguing that plague is a corruption of the air, and turns to the apparition of Achilles. ### Greek text ἀπατηλὸν γοητείας τε ὡς ἀληθῶς ἔμπλεων, αὐτὸς ὃ τρόπος ἀπελέγχει τῆς ἱστορίας. τὸν γάρ τοι λοιμὸν ὑποτέθεται ἐν εἴδει πτωχεύοντος καὶ ῥάκεσιν ἠμφιεσμένου πρεσβύτου ἀνδρὸς ἑωρᾶσθαι, ὃν καταλεύειν ἐπικελευσαμένου τοῦ ᾿Ζ“πολλωνίου πρότερον μὲν πῦρ βάλλειν τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν, εἶθ'᾽ ὕστερον βληθέντα λέθοις κύνα συντετριμμένον καὶ παραπτύοντα ἀφρόν, ὡς οἱ λυττῶντες, φανῆναι, εἰρηκέναι δ᾽ αὖτὸν περὶ τούτου καὶ ἐν τῇ πρὸς τὸν αὐτοχράτορα “ομετιανὸν ἀπολογίᾳ ταῦτα γράφει"..τὸ γὰρ τοῦ λοιμοῦ εἶδος, πτωχῷ δὲ γέροντι εἴκαστο, καὶ εἶδον καὶ ἰδὼν εἷλον οὐ παύσας νόσον, ἀλλ᾽ ἐξελών.““ τίς δὴ οὖν ἐπὶ τούτοις οὐ μέγα τὴν τοῦ θαυματοποιοῦ γελάσεται παραδοξοποιίαν ξῷον ὀφθαλμοῖς καὶ λέθῶν ὑποπῖπτον βολαῖς συντριβόμενόν τε πρὸς ἀν- θρώπων καὶ ἀφρὸν παραπτῦον τὴν τοῦ λοιμοῦ φύσιν ἀκούων. ὃς οὐδ᾽ ἄλλ᾽ ὁτιοῦν τυγχάνει ἢ φθορὰ καὶ κάκωσις ἀέρος ἐπὶ τὸ νοσῶδες τρεπομένου τοῦ περιέχοντος ἐκ πονηρῶν τὲ καὶ φαύλων ἀναθυμιάόεων, ἡ λόγος ἰατρικὸς παραδέδωσι, συνισταμένου; καὶ ἄλλως δ᾽ ἂν τὸ φάσμα διευθυνθείη, ἐπείπερ μόνῃ τῇ τῶν ᾿Εφεσίων πόλει, ἀλλ᾽ οὐχὶ καὶ τοῖς ὁμόροις τὸν λοιμὸν ἐπισκῆψαί φησὶν ὁ λόγος, ὅπερ πῶς οὐκ ἂν γεγόνει κάκωσιν τοῦ περιέχοντος πεπονθύτος; οὐ γὰρ δὴ κατακλεισθὲν μόνῳ ἂν ἐφήδρευσε τῷ περὶ τὴν Ἔφεσον ἀέρι τὸ νόσημα. τέταρτον αὐτῷ παράδοξον ᾿Αχιλλέως ἦν ψυχὴ πρότερον μὲν ἐν χλαμύδι πεντάπηχυς, εἶτα δωδεκάπηχυς τὸ μέγεθος παρὰ τῷ ἰδίῳ αὐτοῦ μνήματι φαινομένη Θετταλούς τὲ καταιτιωμένη ὅτι δὴ τὰ ἐναγίσματα αὐτῷ. ὡς ἔθος ἦν, οὐκ ἐπετέλουν, μηνιῶσά τε εἰσέτι Τρωσὶ τῶν ἐς αὐτὸν πεπλημμελημένων καὶ προστάττουσα τῷ ᾿4πολ- ### English translation (Claude) deceitful and truly full of sorcery, the very manner of the story refutes it. For he supposes that the plague was seen in the form of an old man begging and clothed in rags; that when Apollonius ordered him to be stoned, he first darted fire from his eyes, and then, when struck with stones, appeared as a dog crushed and spitting foam like mad dogs. And he writes that Apollonius spoke of this in his defence before the emperor Domitian: “For the form of the plague was like a poor old man, and I saw it, and seeing it I seized it, not stopping a disease but rooting it out.” Who then will not laugh loudly at this wonder-worker's marvel, hearing that the nature of a plague is a creature that falls under the eyes, is crushed by stones thrown by men, and spits foam? A plague is nothing other than the corruption and damage of the air, the surrounding air being turned toward disease by evil and noxious exhalations, as medical science teaches. The apparition may be held to account in another way too: the account says the plague fell upon the city of the Ephesians alone, and not upon their neighbours; but how could this have happened if the surrounding air had been damaged? The disease would not have been shut up and lain in wait for the air about Ephesus alone. His fourth marvel was the soul of Achilles, appearing at his own tomb first in a cloak five cubits tall, then twelve cubits in size, accusing the Thessalians of not performing the offerings to him as was customary, still angry with the Trojans for their offences against him, and bidding Apollonius ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 4.10; 8.7.9 (quoted); 4.16. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 391 (Kayser 1:391; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/391). ## Kayser p. 392 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/386/#p-392 - Source: Kayser 1:392 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius mocks Apollonius's trivial questions to Achilles' ghost and asks why the meeting was held secretly at night if it was not necromancy. ### Greek text λωνίῳ πέντε λόγους. οὗς ἂν αὐτός τε βούλοιτο καὶ αἵ Μοῖραι συγχωροῖεν, ἀνερέσθαι. εἶθ᾽ ὁ πάντα εἰδὼς καὶ τῶν μελλόντων πρόγνωσιν αὐχῶν ἔτι ἀγνοεῖ, εἰ τάφου τύχοι ᾿Δχιλλεὺς καὶ εἰ Μουσῶν θρῆνοι καὶ Νηρηίδων ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ γεγόνασι, καὶ περὶ τούτων αὐτὸν ἀνερωτᾷ καὶ διαπυνθάνεται, εἰ Πολυξένη ἐπισφαγείη αὐτῷ καὶ εἰ Ἑλένη ἐς Τροίαν ἐληλύθοι, ὡς σεμνά γε καὶ κατεπείγοντα εἰς τὸν φιλόσοφον βίον τοῦ ἥρωος καὶ σπουδῆς ἄξια ἐρωτήματα. θαυμάξει δ᾽ ἐπὶ τούτοις, εἰ τοσοῦτοι ἥρωες παρὰ τοῖς “Βλλησιν ἑνὶ χρόνῳ γεγόνασι καὶ εἰ ἀφίκετο ἐς Τροίαν Παλαμήδης. τὸν δὴ θεῶν ὁρωμένων τε καὶ οὐχ. ὁρωμένων ὁμιλητὴν τοιαῦτα ἀγνοεῖν. καὶ περὶ τοιούτων ἀνερωτᾶν, ποίας οὐχὶ γένοιτ᾽ ἂν αἰσχύνης : δὲ μὴ ἄρα. ἐπειδὴ νεκροῖς ὁμιλῶν εἰσῆκται, ἐπὶ τὸ ψυχρότερον μεταποιεῖ τὰς πεύσεις ὁ συγγραφεύς, ὡς ἂν ὑπεκλύσειε τὴν ὑπόνοιαν τοῦ πέρα τῶν προσἠκόντων αὐτὸν περιειργάσθαι δοκεῖν, καὶ γὰρ δὴ καὶ ἀπολογούμενον αὐτὸν ὑπογράφει. ὅτι μὴ κατὰ νεχρομαντείαν ὁ τρόπος αὐτῷ τῆς φανείσης ὄψεως γένοιτο, «οὔτε γὰρ βόθρον““ εἶπεν ᾿Οδυσσέως ὀρυξάμενος. οὐδ᾽ ἀρνῶν αἵμασι ψυχαγωγήσας, ἐς διάλεξιν τοῦ ᾿Δχιλλέως ἦλθον. ἀλλ᾽ εὐξάμενος ὁπόσα τοῖς ἥρωσιν νδοί φασι δεῖν εὔξασθαι.““ καὶ ταῦτα : νῦν πρὸς τὸν ἑταῖρον ἀποσεμνύνεται ὁ μηδὲν μαθεῖν παρ᾽ ᾿Ινδῶν, μηδὲ ξηλῶσαι τὴν παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς σοφίαν πρὸς τοῦ συγγραφέως μεμαρτυρημένος. τί δῆτα οὖν, ὦ οὗτος, εἰ μή τις ἦν κακοήθης περιεργία, μηδὲ τὸν ἕνα σοι καὶ γνήσιον καὶ μόνον ἑταῖρον Ζίάμιν κουνωνὸν ἐποιοῦ τῆς θαυμαστῆς ταύτης ὄψεώς τε χκαὶ ὁμιλίας; τί δ᾽ οὐχὶ καὶ δι’ ἡμέρας τοῦτο ποιεῦν ἐξῆν. ἀλλὰ τῶν νυκτῶν ἀωρὶ καὶ μόνον; τί δὲ καὶ ### English translation (Claude) ask five questions, whichever he himself wished and the Fates permitted. Then the man who knew everything and boasted of foreknowledge of the future still does not know whether Achilles had a tomb, and whether the Muses and the Nereids lamented him, and asks him about these things and inquires whether Polyxena was slain on his tomb and whether Helen came to Troy: solemn and pressing questions, indeed, for the hero's philosophic life, and worthy of serious effort! Besides these he wonders whether so many heroes arose among the Greeks at one time, and whether Palamedes came to Troy. That the companion of gods seen and unseen should not know such things and should ask about such matters, what disgrace would that not be! Perhaps, since he is introduced conversing with the dead, the writer makes the questions more frigid so as to remove the suspicion that he seemed to meddle beyond what was fitting; for he also describes him defending himself, that the way the apparition appeared to him was not by necromancy: “For I came to converse with Achilles,” he said, “not by digging a trench like Odysseus, nor by summoning souls with the blood of lambs, but by praying all the prayers which the Indians say one must pray to the heroes.” And this the man now boasts of to his companion, the man whom the writer testified learned nothing from the Indians nor imitated their wisdom! Why then, sir, if it was not some malicious meddling, did you not make even your one genuine and only companion Damis a partner of this wonderful sight and converse? Why could you not do this by day too, but only at an unseasonable hour of the night? And why ### Extrabiblical texts - Homer, Od. 11.23–50 (Homer, Odyssey): allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 4.16 (quoted). Odysseus's trench: Homer, Od. 11.23–50. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 392 (Kayser 1:392; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/392). ## Kayser p. 393 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/386/#p-393 - Source: Kayser 1:393 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius argues that Achilles' ghost, which fled at cockcrow and showed anger and spite, was a wicked demon, and dismisses the exorcisms and the raising of the girl at Rome. ### Greek text ἥλαυνον τὴν τοῦ ἥρωος ψυχὴν ἀλεκτρυόνων βοαί: ἀπῆλθε γὰρ“ φησι. «ξὺν ἀστραπῇ μετρίᾳ, καὶ γὰρ δὴ καὶ ἀλεκτρυόνες ἤδη ὠδῆς ἥπτοντο. ( θαίμοσι μὲν οὖν πονηροῖς, γένοιτ᾽ ἂν ἴσως ὁ τῆς ὥρας ἐπιτήδειος εἰς περιέργους ὁμιλίας καιρός, ἀλλ᾽ οὐχὶ ὁ ἡρωίδι ψυχῆ. ἣν τῆς παχείας τοῦ σώματος ἐλευθερωθεῖσαν ὕλης ἀγαθὴν καὶ πανάρετον εἶναι χρεών. ὅ γε μὴν εἰσηγμένος ἐνταῦθα δαίμων βάσκανος καὶ φθονερὸς τὸν τρύπον ὀργίλος τὲ καὶ ταπεινὸς τὴν διάθεσιν ὑποτετύπωται. ἢ οὐχὶ τοιοῦτος ὁ τὸν ᾽άν- τισθένην μειράκιόν τι σπουδαῖον ὡς ἂν δὴ φιλοσόφῳ συνέπεσθαι τῷ ᾿Δπολλωνίῳ πειρώμενον ἀπείργων; προστάττει γὰρ τὸ μὴ ποιεῖσθαι αὐτὸν συνέμπορον τῆς ἑαυτοῦ φιλοσοφίας ἐπιλέγων τὴν αἰτίαν".. Πριαμέδης τὲ γάρ“ φησιν, ἱκανῶς ἐστι καὶ τὸν Ἕκτορα ὑμνῶν οὐ παύεται.“ πῶς δὲ οὐκ ὀργίλος καὶ τὰπεινὸς ὁ Θετταλοῖς. ὅτι μὴ θύοιεν αὐτῷ, θυμούμενος καὶ Τρωσίν, ὅτι δὴ πρὸ μυρίων ὅσων ἐτῶν εἰς αὐτὸν διημαρτήκασι, μὴ καταλλασσόμενος καὶ ταῦτα θύουσι καὶ συνεχῶς σπενδομένοις, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸν Παλαμήδους τάφον αὐτῷ ἀγάλματι φαύλως ἐρριμμένῳ ἀναλαβεῖν ἐγκελευόμενος; τὸ μέντοι πέμπτον καὶ ἕκτον θαῦμα οὐ πολλῆς (ἀν) δέοιτο τοῦ λόγου διατριβῆς εἰς ἔνδειξιν τῆς τοῦ γράφοντος εὐχερείας" δαίμονας γὰρ ἀπελαύνει ἄλλῳ ἄλλον, ἣ φασι. δαί-- μονι, τὸν μὲν γὰρ ἐξ ἀκολάστου μειρακίου. τὸν δὲ ἐπιπλάστως εἰς γυναικείαν μορφὴν σχηματιξόμενον. τουτονὶ δὲ τὸν δαίμονα ἔμπουσαν καὶ λάμιαν αὐτοῖς ὀνόμασιν ὁ σοφώτατος ἀποκαλεῖ. τό γε μὴν ἐπὶ τῆς Ῥωμαίων πόλεως μετὰ ταῦτα κόριον, ὃ τι δὴ μετὰ θάνατον ἐπὶ δευτέραν ξῳὴν ἤγαγεν, ἀπιστότατον καὶ αὐτῷ δόξαν τῷ Φιλοστράτῳ παραιτητέον. ἐν ### English translation (Claude) did the crowing of cocks drive away the hero's soul? “For he departed,” he says, “with a moderate flash of lightning, since the cocks were already beginning their song.” To wicked spirits, perhaps, that time of night might be suitable for meddlesome conversations, but not to the soul of a hero, which, freed from the gross matter of the body, must be good and wholly virtuous. Yet the spirit brought in here is depicted as malicious and envious in character, irascible and mean in disposition. Was not he such, who kept Antisthenes, a serious youth, from following Apollonius as a philosopher? For he bids him not to make him a fellow traveller in his philosophy, giving the reason: “For he is a descendant of Priam enough, and never stops praising Hector.” And how was he not irascible and mean, being angry with the Thessalians because they did not sacrifice to him, and not reconciled with the Trojans for offences against him countless years before, though they sacrificed and poured libations to him continually, but even ordering him to restore the tomb of Palamedes with its statue lying neglected? The fifth and sixth wonders would need no long discussion to show the writer's credulity; for he drives out demons, one, as they say, by another: one from a licentious youth, another feigning to take a woman's form; this demon the most wise man calls by the very names of empusa and lamia. The girl in the city of the Romans afterwards, whom he brought back to a second life after death, seemed most incredible even to Philostratus himself and must be set aside. For ### Scripture references - Matt 12:24: echo, low confidence ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 4.16 (quoted), 4.20, 4.25, 4.45. The saying “driving out demons by a demon” recalls the charge in Matt 12:24. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 393 (Kayser 1:393; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/393). ## Kayser p. 394 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/386/#p-394 - Source: Kayser 1:394 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius notes Philostratus's doubts about the girl's death, the silence of the accuser Euphrates, the Eleusinian priest's refusal, and Philostratus's defence of Apollonius against the charge of sorcery. ### Greek text δισταγμῷ μέντοι ἀμφιβάλλει, μὴ ἄρα σπινθήρ τις Ἵ ψυχῆς ἐνυπάρχων τῇ παιδὶ τοὺς θεραπεύοντας ἐλελήθει. λέγεσθαι γάρ φησιν...ὡὧὡς ψακάξοι μὲν ὃ Ζεύς, ἡ δὲ ἀτμίξοι ἀπὸ τοῦ προσώπου.“ καὶ γὰρ. δὴ εἰ ἀληθῶς αὐτῷ τοιόνδε ἐπ᾽ αὐτῆς Ῥώμης ἐπέπρακτο, οὐκ ἂν ἐλελήθει βασιλέα τε πρῶτον καὶ τοὺς μετ᾽ αὐτὸν ὑπάρχους ἅπαντας, μάλιστα δὲ τὸν φιλόσοφον Εὐφράτην ἐγχωριάξοντα κατ᾽ ἐκεῖνο καιροῦ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς Ῥώμης διατρίβοντα, ὃς δὴ εἰς ὕστερον τὴν κατ᾽ αὐτοῦ κατηγορίαν, ὡς δὴ κατὰ γόητος. ὑποβάλλειν ἱστόρηται. πάντως γὰρ ἂν καὶ τοῦτο, εἰ δὴ τοῦτο γεγονὸς ἦν, ταῖς ἄλλαις κατ᾽ αὐτοῦ διαβολαῖς πρὸς τοῦ κατηγόρου συγκατείλεκτο. καὶ τὰ μὲν ἐν μέρει καὶ κατ᾽ εἶδος αὐτῷ πεπραγμένα τοσαῦτα, μυρία δὲ καὶ ἄλλα κατὰ πρόγνωσιν αὐτὸν λέγων προμαντεύσασθαί τε καὶ προειρηκέναι γράφει καὶ ὡς ᾿4θήνησι βουληθέντα μυηθῆναι τὰ Ἐλευσένια ὁ τῇδε εἶρξεν ἱερεὺς μὴ ἄν ποτὲ φήσας μυήσεσθαι γόητα, μηδὲ τὰ ᾿Ελευσίνια ἀνοῖξαι ἀνθρώπῳ μὴ καθαρῷ τὰ δαιμό- νια. ἀλλὰ καὶ τῷ ἀσελγῶς ἀγείροντι κατὰ τὴν Ῥώμὴν καὶ τὰς Νέρωνος μετὰ κιθάρας ἐπὶ μισθῷ διεξἰόντι ὁδὰς μισθὸν ἐπιδοῦναι τοῖς ἑταίροις τῆς σοφῆς ταύτης ἐπιτηδεύσεως ὁ φιλοσοφώτατος διὰ τὸν Νέρῶνος φόβον προστάττει. Ἔν τούτοις καὶ τοῦ τετάρτου περιγραφέντος ἐν τῷ πέμπτῳ τῆς περὶ αὐτοῦ γραφῆς εἰπών τινα περὶ προγνώσεως αὐτοῦ καὶ ἀποθαυμάσας ὁ συγγραφεὺς ἐπιλέγει ταῦτα κατὰ λέξιν..«ὅτι μὲν δὴ τὰ τοιαῦτα δαιμονίᾳ κινήσει προέλεγε καὶ ὅτι τοῖς γόητα ἡγου- μένοις τὸν ἄνδρα οὐχ ὑγιαίνει ὁ λόγος, δηλοῖ. μὲν καὶ τὰ εἰρημένα, σκεψώμεθα δὲ κἀκεῖνα οἵ γόητες, ἡγοῦμαι δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐγὼ κακοδαιμονεστάτους ἀνθροώ- ### English translation (Claude) he is in doubt and hesitates whether perhaps some spark of soul remained in the girl unnoticed by those attending her. For he says it was said “that it was drizzling, and steam rose from her face.” And indeed, if he had really done such a thing in Rome itself, it would not have escaped the emperor first, and all the prefects after him, and especially the philosopher Euphrates, who was living in the country at that time and staying at Rome, who is recorded to have later brought the charge against him as against a sorcerer. For surely this too, if it had happened, would have been listed by the accuser with the other charges against him. So many, then, are the particular deeds he did. He writes that he foretold and predicted countless other things by foreknowledge; and that at Athens, when he wished to be initiated into the Eleusinian mysteries, the priest there kept him out, saying that he would never initiate a sorcerer, nor open the Eleusinian rites to a man impure in things divine. And the most philosophic man ordered his companions to give a fee to one who was shamelessly collecting money at Rome and going through the songs of Nero with a lyre for pay, because of their fear of Nero. With these things the fourth book is concluded. In the fifth book of his writing about him, after saying some things about his foreknowledge and admiring it, the writer adds this, word for word: “That he foretold such things by a divine impulse, and that the account of those who think the man a sorcerer is unsound, is shown by what has been said. But let us consider this too. Sorcerers, whom I consider the most wretched of men, ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 4.45 (quoted), 4.18, 4.39, 5.12 (quoted). ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 394 (Kayser 1:394; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/394). ## Kayser p. 395 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/386/#p-395 - Source: Kayser 1:395 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius shows that Philostratus implicitly calls the Brahmans sorcerers while Apollonius calls them gods and teachers, so that he falls under the same charge. ### Greek text πῶν, οἵ μὲν ἐς βασάνους εἰδώλων χωροῦντες, οἱ δ᾽ ἐς θυσίας βαρβάρους, οἱ δὲ ἐς τὸ ἐπᾷσαί τι ἢ ἀλεῖψαι μεταποιεῖν φασι τὰ εἱμαρμένα, ὁ δὲ εἵπετο μὲν τοῖς ἐκ Μοιρῶν καὶ προέλεγεν, ὡς ἀνάγκη ἔσεσθαι αὐτά, προέλεγε δὲ οὐ γοητεύων, ἀλλ᾽ ἐξ ὧν οἱ θεοὶ ἔφαι- νον, ἰδών δὲ παρὰ τοῖς ᾿Ινδοῖς τοὺς τρίποδας καὶ τοὺς οἰνοχύους καὶ ὅσα αὐτόματα ἐσφοιτᾶν εἶπον, οὔθ᾽ ὅπως σοφίζοιντο αὐτὰ ἤρετο, οὔτε ἐδεήθη μαθεῖν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπήνει μέν, ξηλοῦν δὲ οὐκ ἠξίου.“ ταῦτα δὲ λέγων δῆλός ἐστι τοὺς περιβοήτους Ἰνδῶν φιλο-σόφους γόητας ἀποφαίνων. περὶ γάρ τοι γοήτων ποιούμενος τὸν λόγον μνημονεύει καὶ τούτων σοφέξεσθαι δὴ τὰ παράδοξα λέγων αὐτοὺς καὶ τόν, περὶ οὗ ὁ λόγος, τῆς τοιασδὶ αὐτῶν σοφιστείας ὡς ἂν μὴ ἀστείας ἀλλότριον ὑποτιθέμενος. οὐκοῦν εἰ φαίνοιτο τούτους θεοὺς ἀποκαλῶν καὶ διδασκάλους ἐπιγραφόμενος αὐτοὺς ὁ ᾿Δπολλώνιος, ὧρα ταῖς κατὰ τῶν διδασκάλων καὶ αὐτὸν ὑπάγειν διαβολαῖς. εἰδ-ἥκται δὴ οὖν παρ᾽ οἷς φησι γυμνοῖς Αἰγυπτίων, ῥήμασιν αὐτοῖς ταῦτα φάσκων" «οὐκ ἀπεικός τὲ παθεῖν μοι δοκῶ φιλοσοφίας ἡττηθεὶς εὖ κεχοσμημένης, ἣν ἐς τὸ πρόσφορον ᾿Ινδοὶ στείλαντες ἐφ᾽ ὑψηλῆς τε καὶ θείας μηχανῆς ἐκκυκλοῦσιν. ὡς δὴ ἐν δίχῃ μὲν ἠγάσθην. ἐν δίκῃ δὲ ἡγοῦμαι σοφούς τε καὶ μακαρίους, ὥρα μανθάνειν.““ καὶ μετὰ βραχέα φησίν" »οὗτοι μὲν γὰρ θεοί τέ εἰσι καὶ κεκόσμηνται κατὰ τὴν Πυθίαν.““ καὶ Ζομετιανῷ δὲ εἰσῆκται λέγων »οκαὶ τίς πρὸς Ιάρχαν σοι πόλεμος ἢ πρὸς Φραώτην τοὺς Ἰνδούς; οὖς ἐγὼ μόνους ἀνθρώπων θεούς τε ἡγοῦμαι καὶ ἀξίους τῆς ἐπωνυμίας ταύτης :““ καὶ ἐν ἄλλοις δὲ ὁμοίως θεούς τε καὶ διδασκάλους τὰνδορὸς ἐπιγράψας ὁ λόγος τοὺς δεδηλωμένους δακτυ- ### English translation (Claude) some going to the torturing of images, others to barbarous sacrifices, others to charms or anointings, claim to change what is fated; but he followed the decrees of the Fates and foretold that they must come to pass, and foretold not by sorcery but from what the gods revealed. When he saw among the Indians the tripods and the cupbearers and all that they said moved of itself, he did not ask how they contrived them, nor did he wish to learn, but he praised them without thinking it right to imitate them.” In saying this he clearly declares the famous philosophers of the Indians to be sorcerers. For when discussing sorcerers he mentions them too, saying that they contrived their marvels, and supposes the man under discussion to be a stranger to such sophistry, as though it were not refined. If, then, Apollonius appears calling these men gods and naming them as his teachers, it is time to bring him too under the charges against his teachers. He is introduced among those he calls the Naked Ones of the Egyptians, saying in so many words: “I think it no wonder that I was overcome by a philosophy well adorned, which the Indians dress suitably and wheel out on a lofty and divine machine. Since I was rightly delighted, and rightly consider them wise and blessed, it is time to learn.” And shortly after he says: “For these are gods, and are adorned as the Pythia is.” And he is introduced saying to Domitian: “And what war have you with Iarchas or with Phraotes the Indians, whom alone of men I consider gods and worthy of this name?” And elsewhere likewise the account names the men as gods and as his teachers, and admits that he received from them the rings mentioned; ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 5.12, 6.11, 8.7.12 (quoted). ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 395 (Kayser 1:395; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/395). ## Kayser p. 396 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/386/#p-396 - Source: Kayser 1:396 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius mocks Apollonius's claim to have made Vespasian king and his commendation of Euphrates, whom he later reviles. ### Greek text λίους τὲ παρ᾽ αὐτῶν εἰληφέναι ὁμολογήσας αὐτὸν ἐπιλέλησται. νῦν καὶ συνδιαβάλλων τοῖς διδασκάλοις τὸν μαθητὴν οὐκ ἐπαίει. ὑποβὰς δ᾽ ἐν τῇ γραφῇ αὐλητὴν ὑποτίθεται καὶ τὸν ᾿Ζπολλώνιον ὥσπερ τινὸς "οὔσης μεγίστης καὶ σοφωτάτης ἐπιστήμης τρόπους αὐλήσεως μάλα σπουδαίως μακροῖς τοῖς διεξηγήμασιν εἴροντα διεξέρχεται. καὶ αὐτοκράτορα Οὐεσπασιανὸν οἷα δὴ θεῷ προσεύξασθαι αὐτῷ ἱστορεῖ, καὶ τὸν μὲν ὡς εὐχῇ εἰρηκέναι τὸν Οὐεσπασιανόν" “οίησόν μὲ βασιλέα,“ τὸν δὲ ἀποκρίνασθαι"..ἐποίσα.“ καὶ τίς οὐκ ἂν μισήσειεν εὐλόγως τῆς ἀλαξονείας τὴν φωνὴν μανίας τὸ μηθὲν ἀποδέουσαν, ὅτε γε ἤδη αὐτὸς θεὸς καὶ βασιλέων ποιητὴς εἶναι φρυάττεται ὃ τῆς Αἰγυπτίας κυβερνήτης νεώς; τοῦτο γὰρ αὐτὸς ἑαυτὸν ὁ ᾿“πολλώνιος γεγονέναι τὴν ψυχὴν ἐν ταῖς πρὸς τὸν ᾿Ινδὸν ὁμιλέαις μιμρῷ πρόσθεν ἡμῖν δεδήλωκε. τῷ δ᾽ αὐτῷ βασιλεῖ, οὗς ἂν αὐτὸς δοκιμάξον τῶν φιλοσόφων συμβούλους τῶν πρακτέων, γνωρίσαι αὐτῷ ἀξιοῦντι κατὰ λέξιν φησίν"..ἀγαθοὶ δὲ τούτων σύμβουλοι καὶ οἵδε οἵ ἄνδρες, τὸν “ίωνα δείξας Ἀαὶ τὸν Εὐφράτην μήπω αὐτῷ ἐς διαφορὰν ἥκοντα." καὶ αὖθις,..ὦ βασιλεῦ, εἶπεν, Εὐφράτης καὶ Ζίων πάλαι σοι γνώριμοι ὄντες πρὸς θύραις εἰσὶν οὐκ ἀφρόντιδες τῶν σῶν. κάλει δὴ κἀκείνους ἐς κοινὸν λόγον, σοφὼ γὰρ τὼ ἄνδρε.“ πρὸς ἃ Οὐεσπασιανὸς..ἀκλείτους““ ἔφη..θύρας παρέχω σοφοῖς ἀνδράσιν.“ εὖγε τῆς προγνώσεως τοῦ ἥρωος" Εὐφράτης νῦν ἀγαθός τε καὶ σοφός, ἐπεὶ μὴ ἐς διαφοράν πῶ αὐτῷ ἐληλύθει, εἰ δ᾽ ἔλθοι --- ὅσον οὔπω δὲ τοῦτ᾽ ἔσται --- ὅρα οἷα περὶ αὐτοῦ ὁ αὐτὸς πρὸς “Ιομετιανὸν γράφει"..«καὶ μὴν ὁπόσα γίγνεται φιλο-σόφῳ ἀνδρὶ κολακεύοντι τοὺς δυνατοὺς δηλοῖ τὰ ### English translation (Claude) now, slandering the disciple along with his teachers, he does not notice it. Further on in the writing he introduces a flute player, and relates how Apollonius very seriously expounded in long discourses the modes of flute playing, as if it were some very great and most wise science. He records that the emperor Vespasian prayed to him as to a god, and that Vespasian said by way of prayer, “Make me king,” and he answered, “I have made you.” Who would not rightly hate the voice of this boasting, which falls nothing short of madness, when the former pilot of an Egyptian ship now gives himself airs as a god and a maker of kings? For Apollonius himself declared to us a little earlier, in his conversations with the Indian, that his soul had been this. When the same emperor asked him to make known to him those of the philosophers whom he himself approved as counsellors in affairs, he says, word for word: “These men too are good counsellors in these matters,” pointing to Dio and Euphrates, who had not yet come to a quarrel with him. And again: “O king,” he said, “Euphrates and Dio, long known to you, are at the doors, not unconcerned for your affairs. Call them too into the common discussion, for the two men are wise.” To which Vespasian said, “I keep doors unshut to wise men.” Bravo for the hero's foreknowledge! Euphrates is now good and wise, since he had not yet come into a quarrel with him; but if he should come into one (and that will be very soon), see what the same man writes about him to Domitian: “And indeed what happens to a philosopher who flatters the powerful is shown by the case of ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 5.21, 5.28 (quoted), 3.24, 5.31, 5.37 (quoted), 8.7.11. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 396 (Kayser 1:396; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/396). ## Kayser p. 397 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/386/#p-397 - Source: Kayser 1:397 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius contrasts Apollonius's abuse of Euphrates before Domitian with his earlier praise of him before Vespasian, as a disproof of his foreknowledge. ### Greek text Εὐφράτου" τούτῳ γὰρ ἐντεῦθεν, τί λέγω χρήματα: πηγαὶ μὲν οὖν εἰσι πλούτου, κἀπὶ τῶν τραπεζῶν ἤδη διαλέγεται κάπηλος ὑποκχάπηλος τελώνης ὀβολοστάτῆς πάντα γιγνόμενος τὰ πωλούμεναά τε καὶ πωλοῦντα, ἐντετύπῶωται δὲ ἀεὶ ταῖς τῶν δυνατῶν θύραις καὶ προσέστηκεν αὐταῖς πλείω καιρὸν ἢ οἵ θυρωροί, ἀπελήφθη δὲ καὶ ὑπὸ τῶν θυρωρῶν πολ- λάκις, ὥσπερ τῶν κυνῶν οἱ λέχνοι, δραχμὴν δὲ οὐδὲ φιλοσόφῳ ἀνδρί ποτε προέμενος ἐπιτειχέξει νῦν τὸν ἑαυτοῦ πλοῦτον ἑτέροις τὸν “ἰγύπτιον τουτονὶ βόσκων χρήμασι καὶ ὀξύνων ἐπ᾽ ἐμὲ γλῶτταν ἀξίαν ἐκτετμῆσθαι. Εὐφράτην μὲν δὴ καταλείπω σοί, σὺ γάρ, ἣν μὴ κόλακας ἐπαινῆς. εὑρήσεις τὸν ἄνθρωπον κακίω ἢ ἑρμηνεύω.“ ὁ δὴ πρὸς τὸν πατέρα τὸν Οὐεσπασιανὸν σοφὸν καὶ ἀγαθὸν τὸν Βὐφράτην μαρτυρόμενος. πρὸς δὲ τὸν υἱὸν ταῦτα περὶ αὐτοῦ διεξιὼν δῆλος ἂν εἴη τὸν αὐτὸν ἐπαινῶν τε καὶ φέγῶν. ἄρ᾽ οὖν ὁ τὴν τῶν μελλόντων προειληφὼς γνῶσιν ἠγνόει, ὃς ἦν τε καὶ ἔσται τὸν τρόπον ὁ Εὐφράτης; καὶ γὰρ οὐ νῦν πρῶτον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῦ Οὐεσπασιανοῦ διαβάλλειν αὐτὸν ὡς δὴ τὸ ἦθος μοχθηρότατον βούλεται. πῶς δὴ οὖν τὸν τοιὄνδε συνίστη βασιλεῖ, ὡς καὶ ἀκλείτους αὐτῷ διὰ τὰς παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ συστάσεις τῶν βασιλείων ἀναπεπετάσθαι τὰς πύλας; ἀλλὰ γὰρ καὶ τυφλῷ. φασί, δῆλον, ὡς ἄρα πρόγνωσιν μὲν συκοφαντεῖται πρὸς τοῦ συγγραφέως ὁ ἄνθοωπος, εἴη δ᾽ ἂν ἄλλως γενναῖος, πάλαι μὲν πρὸ πείρας ἀφθόνως ἑταίροις, ἀτὰρ καὶ τῷ Εὐφράτῃ τῆς εἰς τὰ βασίλεια παρόδου κοινωνῶν, ὕστερον δὲ τῆς διαφορᾶς ἕνεκα τοιαῦτα περὶ αὐτοῦ λέγων. οὔπω μοι διαβάλλειν ὁ λόγος βούλεται τὸν ἄνδρα, ὡς ἂν τὸν Εὐφράτην συκοφαντοῦντα φιλο- ### English translation (Claude) Euphrates. For from this source he has, what shall I say, money? No, fountains of wealth; and he now holds his discussions at the bankers' tables, a huckster, a petty huckster, a tax-collector, a money-weigher, becoming everything that is sold and sells. He is ever imprinted on the doors of the powerful and stands at them longer than the doorkeepers; he has often been shut out by the doorkeepers, like greedy dogs. He who never gave even a drachma to a philosopher now fortifies his wealth against others, feeding with money this Egyptian here and sharpening against me a tongue that deserves to be cut out. Euphrates I leave to you; for if you do not praise flatterers, you will find the man worse than I describe.” So the man who bore witness to the father, Vespasian, that Euphrates was wise and good, in relating these things about him to the son, is plainly both praising and blaming the same man. Did, then, the one who had grasped knowledge of the future not know what Euphrates's character was and would be? For not now for the first time, but already under Vespasian himself, he wishes to slander him as of a most wicked character. How then did he commend such a man to the emperor, so that the gates of the palace stood open unshut to him because of his recommendation? Even a blind man, as they say, can see that the man is falsely credited with foreknowledge by the writer, though he may otherwise have been generous, earlier, before experience, freely sharing his access to the palace with his companions and with Euphrates too, and later, because of the quarrel, saying such things about him. My argument does not yet wish to slander the man as slandering Euphrates, who became the most renowned of the philosophers of his time, ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 8.7.11 (quoted), 5.31–39. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 397 (Kayser 1:397; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/397). ## Kayser p. 398 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/386/#p-398 - Source: Kayser 1:398 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius continues with the talking elm, the satyr, and the cure of the youth bitten by a mad dog, and proposes that every marvel, if true, was worked with a demon's help. ### Greek text σόφων γενόμενον τῶν καθ' ἑαυτὸν ἐπιδοξότατον. ὡς καὶ ἐς δεῦρ᾽, οἷς μέτεστι φιλοσοφίας, ἄδεσθαι, ὦ ὃ καὶ μέγιστον λάβοι ἂν τις, εἰ βούλοιτο, παράδειγμα [τῆς] κατὰ τοὺ ᾿Ζἀπολλωνίου διαβολῆς. εἰ γὰρ οὖν ὁ Εὐφράτης παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς πάσῃ φιλοσοφίᾳ διαπρέψαι ὁμολογηθείη, ὥρα μισοπονηρίαν μὲν ἐκείνου κατη- γορεῖν ἐπεξιόντος τοῖς ἀτόπως ὑπὸ τοῦδε δρωμένοις, τουτονὶ δὲ πρὸς ἐκείνου κατηγορούμενον φαύλην περιβάλλεσθαι δόξαν, ὅτι δὴ μὴ τὸν ἀρέσκοντα τῷ φιλοσόφῳ μετῇξι βίον. Πάλιν ἐν τῷ ἕχτῳ παραδοξολογῶν ὁ μυθολόγος ἄγει μὲν αὐτὸν ἅμα τοῖς ἑταίροις καμήλῳ ὀχούμενον ἐφ᾽ οὕς φησιν Ζ4ἰγυπτίων γυμνοὺς φιλοσόφους, ἔνθα δὴ προστάξαντος τοῦ γυμνοῦ πτελέα, φησί, τὸ δέν- δρον προσαγορεύει τὸν ᾿Δπολλώνιον ἐνάρθρῳ καὶ θήλει τῇ φωνῇ. καὶ τούτοις γε ἡμᾶς ὁ Φιλαλήθης πιστεύειν ἀξιοῖ. εἶτα Πυγμαίους ἄνδρας ὑπὲρ τὴν τοὐύτῶν ἵστορεῖ χώραν καὶ ᾿ἀνθρωποφάγους καὶ Σίκι- ᾿ ἄποδας σάτυρόν τὲ πρὸς τοῦ ᾿Ζ“πολλωνίου μεθυσκχό- μδνον. ἐξ ἐκείνων δ᾽ αὖθις ἐπάνεισιν ἐπὶ τὴν Ἣλλάδα, ὁμιλέαι τε πάλιν αὐτῷ καὶ προγνώσέις ἀνακοινοῦνται πρὸς Τίτον, καὶ δηχθέντα ἔφηβον ὑπὸ λυττῶντος κυνός, ὃν δὴ καὶ ἐμαντεύσατο, ὅς τις εἴη τὴν ψυχήν, ὅτι ὁ τῆς 4ἰγύπτου ποτὲ βασιλεὺς Ζμα- σις, τῆς συμφορᾶς ἀπαλλάττει, μέχρι καὶ τοῦ κυνὸς ἐπιτείνας τὸ φιλάνθρωπον. ταυτὶ μὲν οὖν τὰ πρὸ τῆς κατηγορίας αὐτῷ πεπραγμένα, ἐπιστῆσαι δ᾽ ἄξιον δι᾽ ὅλης τῆς πραγματείας, ὡς ὅτε κἂν ἀληθεύειν δοθῇ τῷ συγγραφεῖ τὰ παράδοξα, συνεργείᾳ δαίμονος ἕκαστον αὐτῷ διαπεπρᾶχθαι τούτων σαφῶς δείκνυται. τό τε γὰρ τοῦ λοιμοῦ προαισθέσθαι ἴσως μὲν οὐδὲ περίεργον ἂν δόξειεν, εἰ ἰκαθὼς αὐτὸο) ### English translation (Claude) so that he is celebrated to this day by those who share in philosophy; in which one might find, if one wished, the greatest example of the slander against Apollonius. For if it is agreed among them that Euphrates excelled in all philosophy, it is time to accuse him of hatred of wickedness, in proceeding against what was done absurdly by this man, and to clothe the one accused by him with a bad reputation, because he did not follow the life pleasing to a philosopher. Again in the sixth book the teller of tales, telling marvels, leads him with his companions, riding on a camel, to those he calls the Naked philosophers of the Egyptians; there, at the bidding of the naked one, an elm, he says, the tree, addresses Apollonius in an articulate and female voice. And the Lover of Truth expects us to believe this! Then he records Pygmy men beyond their land, cannibals and Shadow-feet, and a satyr made drunk by Apollonius. From there he returns again to Greece, and conversations and predictions are again shared with Titus; and he frees from his misfortune a youth bitten by a mad dog, whose soul he even divined to be that of Amasis, once king of Egypt, extending his kindness even to the dog. These, then, are what he did before the accusation. But it is worth noting throughout the whole work that, even if the writer is granted to be telling the truth about the marvels, it is clearly shown that each of them was done with the cooperation of a demon. To perceive the plague beforehand would perhaps not seem meddlesome, if, as ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 6.10, 6.25, 6.27, 6.29–34, 6.43. Kayser's square brackets around τῆς mark a word he deletes; it is left out. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 398 (Kayser 1:398; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/398). ## Kayser p. 399 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/386/#p-399 - Source: Kayser 1:399 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius argues that Apollonius's foreknowledge, his meeting with Achilles and his exorcisms came, if real, from demons, and that the girl was not truly raised. ### Greek text ἀπὸ λεπτοτάτης καὶ καθαρᾶς διαίτης κατείληπτο, ὡς αὐτὸς ἔφησεν. ἴσως δὲ καὶ αὐτὸ ἐξ ὁμιλίας δαίμονος αὐτῷ προμεμήνυτο. καὶ γὰρ δὴ καὶ τὰ λοιπά, ὅσα κατὰ πρόγνωσιν διειληφώς τε καὶ προειρηκὼς εἰσῆκται, εἰ καὶ μυρίοις ἐλέγχοις ἐξ αὐτῆς πάρεστι τῆς τοῦ Φιλοστράτου γραφῆς εὐθύνειν, ὅμως ἵνα συγχωρηθείη καὶ τοῦτ᾽ εἶναι ἀληθές, κατὰ περίεργον μηχανὴν εἴποιμ᾽ ἂν πρὸς δαίμονος αὐτῷ παρέδρου τινὰ τῶν μελλόντων. οὐδὲ γὰρ πάντα, κατειλῆφθαι. τοῦτο δὲ παρίστησι σαφὲς τὸ μὴ δι᾽ ὅλου καὶ περὺ πάντων τὴν πρόγνωσιν αὐτὸν ἀποσώξειν, ἀπορεῖν δὲ ἐν πλείστοις καὶ πυνθάνεσθαι δι᾿ ἄγνοιαν, ὅπερ οὐκ ἄν, εἰ θείας ἀρετῆς μετῆν αὐτῷ, πεπόνθει. καὶ αὐτὸ δὲ τὸ παῦσαι τὸν λοιμόν, ὁποῖον εἴληχε τὸ δρᾶμα, ὅτι φάσμα καὶ οὐδὲν τι πλέον ἦν, προδεδήλωται. ἀλλὰ καὶ ἡ ψυχὴ ᾿Δχιλλέως παρὰ τῷ αὐτοῦ μνήματι τέ ἂν διατρίβοι τὰς ἐν μακάρων νήσοις, ὡς ἂν φήσειέ τις. ἀπολείπουσα διαγωγάς. εἰ μὴ καὶ τοῦτο δαίμονος ἦν ἐπιφανείας παρουσία; καὶ τοῦ ἀσελγοῦς δὲ μειρακίου σαφῶς ἔνοικον δαίμονα, καὶ πάλιν, ἣν ἔφησεν ἔμπουσάν τε καὶ λάμιαν ἐμπεπαρὠὡνηκέναι τῷ Μενίππῳ; μείζονι τάχ᾽ ἴσως ἐξελήλακε δαίμονι; ὁμοίως τε αὖ καὶ τὸν τὰς φρένας παρατραπέντα νεανίαν ὑπὸ τοῦ λυττῶντος κυνὸς αὐτόν τὲ τὸν δαιμονῶντα κύνα τῇ αὐτῇ μετήλλαξε μεθόδῳ. ὅρα δὴ οὖν, ὡς ἔφην, τὴν πᾶσαν αὐτῷ παραδοξοποιίαν, ὡς διὰ δαιμονικῆς ἀπετελεῖτο ὑπουργίας. τὸ γὰρ τῆς ἀναβιωσάσης κόρης, εἴγ᾽ ἔμπνους ὑπῆρχε σπινθῆρα ψυχῆς κατὰ τὸν συγγραφέα καὶ ἰκμάδα ἐπὶ τοῦ προσώπου φέρουσα, περιαιρετέον τῆς θαυματοποιίας, οὐ γὰρ ἄν, ὡς καὶ πρόσθεν ἔφην, σιωπῇ τὸ τηλικοῦτο παρεδόθη ἐπ᾽ αὐτῆς Ῥώμης βασιλέως ### English translation (Claude) he himself said, he had grasped it by a very light and pure diet. But perhaps this too was told him beforehand through converse with a demon. And as for the rest that he is introduced as having grasped and foretold by foreknowledge, though it could be held to account with countless refutations from the very writing of Philostratus, still, granting that this too is true, I would say that he learned some of the future by a meddlesome contrivance from an attendant demon. For he did not grasp everything. This is made clear by his not keeping his foreknowledge throughout and about all things, but being at a loss in very many things and asking questions through ignorance, which he would not have suffered if he had shared in divine virtue. As for his stopping the plague, what kind of drama it was, that it was an apparition and nothing more, has been shown already. And why would the soul of Achilles linger at his tomb, leaving, as one might say, its life in the Islands of the Blessed, unless this too was the presence of a demon's appearance? And the licentious youth clearly had a demon dwelling in him; and the one he called an empusa and lamia, which played the drunken fool with Menippus, he perhaps drove out by a greater demon. Likewise he changed both the youth whose mind was deranged by the mad dog and the possessed dog itself by the same method. See, then, as I said, how all his marvel-working was accomplished through demonic service. As for the girl who came back to life, if she still breathed and bore, according to the writer, a spark of soul and moisture on her face, she must be removed from the wonders; for, as I said before, so great a thing would not have been passed over in silence if it had happened in Rome itself in the presence of the emperor. ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 4.16, 4.20, 4.25, 6.43, 4.45. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 399 (Kayser 1:399; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/399). ## Kayser p. 400 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/386/#p-400 - Source: Kayser 1:400 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius passes to the seventh book: Apollonius's boast of knowing everything, Damis's disguise, and the charges against him at Rome. ### Greek text ἐπιπαρόντος γεγενημένον. μυρία μὲν οὖν καὶ ἄλλα πάρεστιν ἐκ τῶν αὐτῶν ἀναλέξασθαι συγγραμμάτων τό τε ἐν αὐτοῖς εὐέλεγκτον καὶ ἀσύστατον μυθῶδές τὸ καὶ τερατῶδες ἀπευθύνειν. ὅμως, ἐπεί γε οὐδὲ πολλῆς τὰ κατὰ τὸν ἄνδρα δεῖται σπουδαιολογίας, οὐχ ὅτι γε ἐν θείοις καὶ παραδόξοις καὶ θαυμασίοις. ἀλλ᾽ οὐδ᾽ ἐν φιλοσόφοις παρά τισι τῶν νῦν μνήμης ὑπαρχούσης αὐτοῦ τοῖς εἰρημένοις ἀρκεσθέντες μετίωμεν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸ ἕβδομον περὶ αὐτοῦ τὸ σύγγραμμα. Κατηγορεῖται δῆτα γοητείαν ὁ ἀνήρ. εἶτα Ζη- μητρίῳ φιλοσόφῳ ἀποτρέποντι αὐτὸν τῆς ἐπὶ τὴν Ῥώμην παρόδου μὴ πειθόμενος ἐπαχθῆ τινα καὶ φορτικὰ περὶ ἑαυτοῦ ὧδέ πῶς λέγει »ἐγὼ δὲ γιγνώσκω μὲν πλεῖστα ἀνθρώπων, ἅτε εἰδὼς πάντα, οἶδα δὲ ὧν οἶδα τὰ μὲν σπουδαίοις, τὰ δὲ σοφοῖς, πάντ᾽ εἰδέναι μεγαλαυχούμενος προϊὼν ἄγνοιαν τινῶν πρὸς τοῦ λόγου κατηγορεῖται. δἶτα Ζ4άμις αὐτῷ μεταπλάττεττιι διὰ θανάτου φόβον τὸν φιλόσοφον ἐπικρυπτόμενος. ἄκουε δ᾽ οὖν τοῦ συγγραφέως, ἃ περὶ αὐτοῦ φησιν ἀπολογούμενος"..αἰτέα μὲν ἥδε σχῆμα," οὐ γὰρ κακία γε αὐτὸ μεθεῖναί φησιν,.»οὐδὲ μεταγνούς, τέχνην δὲ ἐπαινέσας, ἣν ὑπῆλθεν στρατος τέσσαρας αἰτίας τὰς δὴ εὐχερεῖς αὐτῷ πρὸς ἀπολογίαν νομισθείσας ἐκτίθησιν ἀπὸ πλείστων καὶ λήν, ἡ δέ, τοῦ χάριν οἵ ἄνθρωποι θεὸν αὐτὸν νδνομίκασι, τρίτην, πόθεν προείποι ᾿Εφεσίοις τὸν λοι- ὁ ### English translation (Claude) Countless other things could be gathered from the same books, and what in them is easy to refute, incoherent, fabulous and monstrous could be held to account. But since the man's affairs need no great seriousness, as his memory survives with some people today not among the divine and marvellous and wonderful, but not even among the philosophers, let us be content with what has been said and pass on to the seventh book about him. The man is accused of sorcery. Then, not obeying Demetrius the philosopher, who tried to turn him from going to Rome, he says some offensive and vulgar things about himself, roughly thus: “I know more than other men, since I know everything; and of what I know, I know some things as the good know, others as the wise …” Boasting that he knows everything, he is convicted by the account, as it goes on, of ignorance of some things. Then Damis, out of fear of death, changes his appearance for him, hiding the philosopher. Hear what the writer says of him in his defence: “This was the reason for the dress,” for he says it was not out of cowardice that he put it off, “nor from repentance, but approving a device which he adopted …” … [He] sets out four charges which he thought easy to answer, chosen from very many …: one, … ; another, why men thought him a god; the third, how he foretold the plague to the Ephesians; … ### Translation notes - The lower part of this page is scrambled in the OCR (lines from different places run together); the sense is given and the gaps marked “…”. Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 7.10–11, 7.14 (quoted), 7.15, 7.20, 8.5. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 400 (Kayser 1:400; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/400). ## Kayser p. 401 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/386/#p-401 - Source: Kayser 1:401 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius recounts the release from the fetter, the trial before Domitian, and Apollonius's disappearance from court, and quotes Damis's remark on the fetter. ### Greek text τὴν ἀπολογίαν αὐτὸν γεγραφέναι. πρότερον δ᾽ ἴστορεῖ δεσμοῖς αὐτὸν παραδοθῆναι καί τι θαυμαστὸν ἐνταῦθα κατεργάσασθαι᾽ τῷ γάρ τοι Ζάμιδι μάλα λυπηρῶς, ὡς ἂν ἐπὶ συμφορᾷ τοῦ διδασκάλου, διαχειμένῳ αὐτόματον ἐπιδεῖξαι λελυμένον τοῦ δεσμοῦ τὸ σκέλος. εἶτα πάλιν ἀναλαβόντ᾽ αὐτὸν τῆς λύπης ἐνθεῖναι εἰς τὸ πρότερον σχῆμα τὸν πόδα. μετὰ τοῦτο χρινόμενον αὐτὸν ἐπὶ βασιλέως “ομετιανοῦ γράφει. [εἶτα] δὴ τῶν ἐγκλημάτων ἀπολυθῆναι καὶ μετὰ τὴν τῶν ἐγκλημάτων λύσιν οὐκ οἶδ᾽ ὅπως ἀκαίρως, μοι δοχεῖν, ἐν τῷ δικαστηρίῳ αὐτὰ δὴ ταῦτα ἀναφωνῆσαι..δός, εἰ βούλει, κἀμοὶ τόπον. εἰ δὲ μή, πέμπε τὸν ληψόμενόν μου τὸ σῶμα, τὴν γὰρ ψυχὴν ἀδύνατον. μᾶλλον δὲ οὐδ᾽ ἂν τὸ σώμα τούμὸν λάβοις" οὐ γάρ μὲ πτενέεις. ἐπεὶ οὔτοι μόρσιμός εἰμι,“ καὶ δὴ ἐπὶ τουτῷ τῷ περιβοήτῷ οήμᾶτι ἀφανισθῆναι αὐτοῦ καταστρέφει δρᾶμα. ᾿ Ὁ μὲν οὖν συγγραφεὺς ἐπὶ τοῦ κατὰ τὸ δεσμω-τήριον θαύματος κατὰ φαντασίαν. ὡς ἔοικεν, ὑπὸ τοῦ παρέδρου δαίμονος τῷ μιδῇ ἑωραμένου ἐπιφέρει λέγων «τότε πρῶτον ὁ Ζάμις φησὶν ἀκριβῶς ξυνεῖναι τῆς ᾿Δπολλωνίου φύσεως. ὅτι θεία τε εἴη καὶ χρείττων ἀνθρώπου, μὴ γὰρ θύσαντά τι. πῶς γὰρ ἂν ἐν δεσμωτηρίῳ; μηδὲ εὐξάμενον, μηδὲ εἰπόντα τι καταγελάσαι τοῦ δεσμοῦ καὶ ἐναρμόσαντα αὐτῷ ᾷ οὔποτ᾽ ἂν καταγνοίην βραδυτῆτα τοῦ φοιτητοῦ, εἰ τὸν πάντα βίον συνὼν αὐτῷ καὶ διά τινῶν περιέργων ### English translation (Claude) that he wrote the defence. Earlier he records that he was handed over to fetters and worked a marvel there: to Damis, who was in great distress at his teacher's misfortune, he showed his leg freed of itself from the fetter, then, having relieved him of his grief, put his foot back in its former position. After this he writes that he was tried before the emperor Domitian and acquitted of the charges; and after the acquittal, unseasonably, it seems to me, he cried out these very words in the court: “Give me too a place, if you will; if not, send someone to take my body, for my soul you cannot. Or rather, you will not take even my body: ‘for you shall not kill me, since I am not fated to die.’” And with this celebrated saying he ends the drama with his disappearance. The writer, then, concerning the wonder in the prison, which was apparently seen in fantasy by Damis through the attendant demon, adds: “Then first, says Damis, he understood exactly the nature of Apollonius, that it was divine and better than a man's; for without sacrificing anything (how could he, in prison?), without praying, without saying anything, he laughed at the fetter and fitted his leg into it again …” I could never condemn the slowness of the disciple, if, having lived with him all his life and through certain meddlesome arts ### Extrabiblical texts - Homer, Il. 22.13 (Homer, Iliad): quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 7.38 (quoted), 8.5 (quoted; the last words are Homer, Il. 22.13). Kayser's square brackets around εἶτα (“then”) mark a word he deletes; it is left out. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 401 (Kayser 1:401; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/401). ## Kayser p. 402 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/402/#p-402 - Source: Kayser 1:402 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius argues that Damis's surprise shows Apollonius's earlier marvels were done by magical means, and turns Apollonius's own dilemma to Domitian against him. ### Greek text ὁρῶν αὐτὸν ἀποτελοῦντα τὰ παράδοξα οὐδέν τι διαφέρειν αὐτὸν ἡγεῖτο τῆς θνητῆς φύσεως, ἀλλ᾽ ἔτι; καὶ νῦν μετὰ τοσαύτην θαυματουργίαν τὰ κατ᾽ αὐὖ-, τὸν ἀγνοεῖ, εἰχότως δ᾽ ἀγωνιᾷ καὶ δέδιε ὡς ὑπὲρ ἀνθρώπου, μή τι πάθοι παρὰ προαίρεσιν. εἰ δὲ δὴ πρῶτον ἄρτι μετὰ τὴν τοσαύτην διατριβήν, ὅτι δὴ θεῖο9 εἴη χαὶ κρείττονος ἀνθρώπου φύσεως, συνίησι, τὴν τούτου συνιδεῖν ἄξιον. αἰτίαν, ἣν αὐτὸς ὁ συγγραφεὺς δηλοῖ λέγων ««μὴ γὰρ θύσαντά τι, μηδὲ ἐπευξάμενον, μηδέ τι τῶν ἀπορρήτων εἰρηκότα" τὸ παράδοξον ἰδεῖν αὐτὸν πεποιηκότα. οὐκοῦν τὰ πρότερον διὰ περιέργου μηχανῆς ἐτελεῖτο τῷ ἀνδρί, διὸ μηδὲ χαταπλήττεσθαι αὐτά, ὃ μηδὲ θαυμάζξειν τὸν ΖΔάμιν, εἰκότως δὲ νῦν τοῦτο πρῶτον πέπον - εν, ὡς ξένου τινὸς ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ παρὰ τὰ συνήθη διαπεπραγμένου. πρὸς τὸ δειχθὲν δὲ τοῦ δεσμοῦ φάσμα καὶ τὴν ἀπὸ τοῦ δικαστηρίου ἀναχώρησιν τὰς πρὸς “ομετιανὸν αὐτοῦ τοῦ ᾿Δ4πολλωνέου φω-; νὰς παραθείμην ἄν᾽ δεσμοῖς γάρ τοι αὐτὸν παρα- δοθῆναι προστάξαντος βασιλέως πάνυ γε ἀκολούθῶς ὁ ᾿Δπολλώνιος συνελογίσατο ὡδί πως.»εἰ : μὲν γόητά μὲ ἡγῇ. πῶς δήσεις; εἰ δὲ δήσεις. πῶς; γόητα εἶναι φήσεις;““ ἀντικρούσει γοῦν αὐτῷ τὸ ὡδί πὼς ἐκ τούτων ὁρμώμενος᾽ εἰ μὲν οὐ γόης, πῷς λέλυταί σου τὸ σκέλος; εἰ δὲ λέλυται. πῶς οὐ γόης: καὶ εἰ τῷ ὑπομεῖναι τὸν δεσμὸν οὐ γόης, τῷ μὴ ὑπομεῖναι καὶ κατ᾽ αὐτὸν ὡμολόγηται γόης. καὶ αὖ πάλιν, εἰ ὑπομείνας τὸ δικαστήριον οὐ γόης, τῷ δὲ διαδρᾶναι τοῦτο καὶ τοὺς ἀμφ᾽ αὐτὸν βασι- λέα, λέγω καὶ τοὺς ἐν κύκλῳ δορυφόρους. σαφῶς. ἀναπέφανται γόης. ὃ δή μοι δοκῶ, συνῃσθημένος ὁ λόγος θεραπεύει τὸ γεγονὸς ὡς δὴ ἄνευ θυσιῶν ### English translation (Claude) seeing him perform his marvels, he thought him in no way different from mortal nature, but even now, after so much wonder-working, does not know his condition, and naturally is anxious and afraid for him as for a man, lest he suffer something against his will. But if he now understands for the first time, after so long a time together, that he was divine and of a nature better than man's, it is worth seeing the reason, which the writer himself shows when he says: “without sacrificing anything, without praying, without saying any secret words,” he saw him do the marvel. So his earlier deeds were accomplished by the man through a meddlesome contrivance; for this reason Damis was not astonished at them nor wondered, but naturally now felt this for the first time, as at something strange done by him contrary to his custom. Against the apparition of the fetter and the departure from the court I would set the words of Apollonius himself to Domitian. When the emperor ordered him to be handed over to fetters, Apollonius reasoned quite consistently somewhat as follows: “If you consider me a sorcerer, how will you bind me? And if you bind me, how will you say I am a sorcerer?” One may retort on him, starting from this, somewhat thus: if you are not a sorcerer, how has your leg been freed? And if it has been freed, how are you not a sorcerer? And if by enduring the fetter you are not a sorcerer, then by not enduring it, by your own reckoning, you are admittedly a sorcerer. And again, if by enduring the court you are not a sorcerer, then by escaping from it and from those about the emperor, I mean the guards standing round, you are plainly shown to be a sorcerer. Being aware of this, it seems to me, the account tries to remedy what happened, as though without sacrifices ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 7.38, 7.34 (quoted). ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 402 (Kayser 1:402; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/402). ## Kayser p. 403 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/402/#p-403 - Source: Kayser 1:403 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius shows Apollonius's lack of foreknowledge in his surprise at release and his useless written defence, and quotes his boast to Domitian that he made Vespasian king. ### Greek text καὶ ἐπῳδῶν ἀρρήτῳ τινὶ καὶ ὑπὲρ ἄνθρωπον δυ- νάμει τοῦ παραδόξου πεφηνότος. ἀλλὰ γὰρ οὐκ ἐς μακρὰν αὖθις ὁ τῆς φύσεως παραστήσεται ἔλεγχος" αὐτίκα γάρ τινος ἐπιστάντος αὐτῷ καὶ φήσαντος »ἀφίησί σε. ὦ ᾿Ζπολλώνιε, τουτωνὶ τῶν δεσμῶν ὁ βασιλεὺς καὶ ἐλευθέριον δεσμωτήριον συγχωρεῖ οἰκεῖν“ ὁ χρείττων ἢ ἄνθρωπος καὶ τῶν μελλόντων προγνώστης ὑπὸ τῆς ἄγαν, ὡς εἰκός, περιχαρείας ἀποπεσὼν τῆς προγνώσεως πυνθάνεται λέγων,.τίς οὖν ὃ μετασκευάσων μὲ ἐντεῦθεν,““ ὁ δὲ.,ἐγώ.“5 ἔφη..καὶ ἕπου.“ εἶτα καὶ λόγον ἀπολογίας ὁ θειότατος μάλα γε πεφροντισμένως συντάττει, ἀγνοῶν, ὅτι δῆτα εἰς μάτην αὐτῷ σπουδασθήσεται ἡ γραφή. οἴεται μὲν γὰρ ἀκούσεσθαι αὐτοῦ ἀπολογουμένου βασιλέα, καὶ ὡς ἀχουσομένου γε σφόδρα πιθανῶς παρασκευάξεται τὴν ἀπολογίαν, ὁ δὲ ταύτην μὴ ἀναμείνας εἰς οὐ δέον αὐτοῦ τὴν σπουδὴν κατεστήσατο. ἄκουε δὴ οὖν καὶ περὶ τούτων, οἷά φησιν ὁ ἔλεγχος" »ἐπεὶ δὲ καὶ λόγος αὐτῷ. συνεγράφη τις ὡς πρὸς ὕδωρ τὴν ἀπολογέαν ἀφήσοντι, ξυνεῖλε δὲ αὐτὸν ὁ τύραννος ἐς ἃς εἴρηκα ἐρωτήσεις. ἀναγεγράφθω καὶ ὁ λόγος.“ ὅρα δή, πῶς τοῦ μέλλοντος πορρωτάτω τυγχάνων ὁ πάντα θειότατος μετὰ πλείστης ὅσης φροντίδος ὡς πρὸς ὕδωρ τὴν ἀπολογίαν ποιησόμενος ἐσπούδαξεν. ἶ ᾿Δλλὰ γὰρ διεξιτητέον καὶ τὴν εἰς μάτην αὐτῷ ταύτῃ, “1ομετιανῷ προσφωνῶν ἀπαυθαδίξεται λέ- γῶν, ὡς ἄρα Οὐεσπασιανὸς..σὲ μὲν βασιλέα ἐποίησεν, ὑπ᾽ ἐμοῦ δὲ ἐγένετο.“ βαβαὶ τῆς ἀλαζονείας, ### English translation (Claude) and incantations, the marvel appeared by some ineffable power above man. But before long the proof of his nature will appear again. For at once, when someone came to him and said, “The emperor releases you, Apollonius, from these fetters and allows you to live in the open prison,” the man better than a man and foreknower of the future, falling, it seems, from his foreknowledge through excessive joy, asks, “Who, then, will move me from here?” and the other said, “I; follow me.” Then the most divine man very carefully composes a speech of defence, not knowing that the writing will be laboured in vain. For he thinks the emperor will hear him defending himself, and as though he would hear it he prepares the defence very persuasively; but the emperor did not wait for it and made his effort useless. Hear, then, what the refutation says about this too: “Since a speech was also composed by him, as one who would deliver his defence by the water-clock, but the tyrant confined him to the questions I have mentioned, let the speech too be recorded.” See how the all-divine man, being very far from knowing the future, was eager, with the greatest care, to make his defence by the water-clock. But we must also go through the defence that was composed in vain, in which, addressing Domitian, he behaves arrogantly, saying that Vespasian “made you king, but was made king by me.” Oh, the boasting, ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 7.40, 8.6, 8.7.4 (quoted). ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 403 (Kayser 1:403; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/403). ## Kayser p. 404 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/402/#p-404 - Source: Kayser 1:404 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius turns Apollonius's definition of sorcerers as false sages against the marvels of his own teachers, and introduces his teaching on the Fates. ### Greek text ἣν οὔτι γε ὁ τυχών, ἀλλ᾽ οὐδὲ εἰ φιλόσοφός τις ἀληθῶς καὶ τὴν ἀνθρωπείαν ὑπεραίρων ἐγεγόνει φύσιν. ἐτερατεύσατο ἂν μὴ οὐχὶ δέκην ἀνοίας παρὰ τοῖς ἔμφροσιν ὑποσχών. εἶτα δὲ τῆς κατ᾽ αὐτὸν ὑποψίας ἑαυτὸν ἀπολυόμενος ταῦτα περὶ γοήτων φησίν"..ἀλλὰ τοὺς γόητας. ψευδοσόφους φημί, τὰ γὰρ οὐκ ὄντα. εἶναι παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς, καὶ τὰ ὄντα ἄπιστα εἶναι.“ καταμάθοι δ᾽ οὖν τις ἔκ τε τῆς ὅλης πραγματείας καὶ τῶν ἐν μέρει δεδηλωμένων, πότερα ἐν τ θείοις καὶ φιλοσόφοις ἢ ἐν γόησιν αὐτὸν καταταχτέον, ἐπιστήσας οἷς τὲ αὐτὸς περὶ γοήτων καὶ ψεῦ δοσόφων εἴρηκε καὶ οἷς δεδήλωκεν ἡ κατ᾽ αὐτὸν ἱστορία᾽ δρύες τε γὰρ καὶ πτελέαι ἐνάρθρῳ καὶ θήλει φωνῇ λαλοῦσαν καὶ τρίποδες αὐτόματοι φοιτῶντες τὸ καὶ χάλκεοι θεράποντες διακονούμενοι πέθοι τὲ ὃμβοων καὶ ἀνέμων καὶ σανδαράκινον ὕδωρ καὶ ὅσα ἄλλα τοιαῦτα εἰσῆκται. παρ᾽ οἷς ἡγεῖτο θεοῖς, οὗς καὶ οὐκ ὦκνει διδασκάλους ἐπιγράφεσθαι, τίνος ἂν εἶεν παφαστατικὰ ἢ τῶν,..τὰ οὐκ ὄντα εἶναι καὶ τὰ ὄντα ἄπιστα εἶναι" παραδεικνύντων:; οὗς αὐτὸς γόητας ὀνομάζων ψευδοσύφους ὑπάρχειν ἀποφαίνεται. ἤτοι οὖν ἐπὶ τούτοις ὁ θεῖος καὶ ἐνάρετος καὶ θεοῖς κεχαρισμένος τὸ σοφίας ἀναδησάμενος βραβεῖον αὐτοῦ Πυθαγόρου καὶ τῶν, ὅσοι μετ᾽ ἐκεῖνον, θειότερος ἀληθῶς καὶ μακρῷ εὐδαιμονέστερος ἂν κριθείη, ἢ ἔμπαλιν ψευδοσοφίας ἁλοὺς κακοδαιμόνῶν ἀποίσεται τὰ πρωτεῖα. Πάλιν δ᾽ ἐν τῇ γραφῇ περὶ Μοιρῶν ἰσχύος φιλοσοφῆσαι αὐτὸν ἐν ἸΙωνίᾳ φησὶ διδάσκοντα οὕτως ἄτρεπτα εἶναι, ἃ κλώθουσιν, ὡς εἰ καὶ βασιλείαν τῷ ψηφίσαιντο ἑτέρῳ ἤδη ὑπάρχουσαν, οὐδ᾽ ἂν ἀποκτείνειέ τις τοῦτον, ὡς μὴ ἀφαιρεθείη ποτὲ ὑπ᾽ ### English translation (Claude) which not just anyone, but not even someone who was truly a philosopher and rose above human nature, would have uttered so monstrously without paying the penalty for folly among sensible men! Then, clearing himself of the suspicion against him, he says this about sorcerers: “But I call sorcerers false sages; for with them things that are not exist, and things that exist are not to be believed.” One may learn, then, from the whole work and from what has been shown in detail, whether he should be ranked among the divine and the philosophers or among sorcerers, by attending both to what he himself has said about sorcerers and false sages and to what the history about him has shown. Oaks and elms speaking in an articulate and female voice, tripods moving of themselves, bronze servants waiting at table, jars of rains and winds, red water and whatever else of the kind is brought in among those whom he considered gods and did not hesitate to name as his teachers: of whom would these be evidence, if not of those who show “that things that are not exist, and things that exist are not to be believed,” whom he himself, calling them sorcerers, declares to be false sages? Either, then, on these grounds the divine, virtuous man, dear to the gods, crowned with the prize of wisdom, would be judged truly more divine and far happier than Pythagoras himself and those after him; or, conversely, convicted of false wisdom, he will carry off the first prize of the most wretched. Again, in the writing he says that he philosophized in Ionia about the power of the Fates, teaching that what they spin is so unchangeable that if they had voted the kingship to another man who already held it, no one could kill him so as to take it from him by ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 8.7.2 (quoted), 8.7.9. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 404 (Kayser 1:404; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/404). ## Kayser p. 405 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/402/#p-405 - Source: Kayser 1:405 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius quotes Apollonius's doctrine that the Fates are unchangeable and his flattering words to Domitian, contrasting them with his earlier sayings against the emperor. ### Greek text τῶν δοξάντων ταῖς “Μοίραις. καὶ τούτοις ἐπιλέγει αὐταῖς συλλαβαῖς ὅτῳ πέπφωται γενέσθαι τεκτο-- νικῷ. οὗτος, κἂν ἀποκοπῇ τὼ χεῖρε, τεκτονιπὸς ἔσται, καὶ ὅτῳ νίκην ἐν Ὀλυμπίᾳ δρόμου ἄρασθαι, οὗτος, οὐδ᾽ εἰ πηρωθείη τὸ σκέλος, ἁμαρτήσεται τῆς νίκης, καὶ ὅτῳ ἔνευσαν “Μοῖραι τὸ ἐν τοξικῇ κράτος, οὗτορ; οὐδ᾽ εὐ ἀποβάλοι τὰς ὄψεις, ἐκπεσεῦται τοῦ εὐσκόπου.““ τούτοις τὸν ἄρχοντα κολαἐς τοὺς ᾿Δκρφισίους δήπου ὁρῶν καὶ τοὺς Λαΐους ᾿4στυάγην τε τὸν Μῆδον καὶ πολλοὺς ἑτέρους εὺ τίθεσθαι τὰ τοιαῦτα δόξαντας. ὧν οἱ μὲν παῖδας, οἱ δὲ ἐγγόνους ἀποκτείνειν οἰηθέντες ἀφῃρἔθησαν ὑπ᾽ αὐτῶν τὸ βασιλεύειν ἀναφύντων ἐπ᾽ αὐτοὺς τ ἐξ ἀφανοῦς ξὺν τῷ πεπρωμένῳ,, καὶ εἰ μὲν ἠγάπων ἀπείληψο μὲν ὑπὸ Βιτελλίου. κατεπίμπρατο δὲ ὁ ναὸς τοῦ “4ιὸς περὶ τὰς ὀφρῦς τοῦ ἄστεος, ὁ δ᾽ εὖ κείσεσθαι τὰ ἑαυτοῦ ἔφασκεν; [ μὴ διαφύγοις αὖ- τόν --- καίτοι “μειράκιον ἱκανῶς ἦσθα, καὶ οὔπω οὗτος --- ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως, ἐπεὶ Μοίραις ἐδόκει ἕτερα, ὁ μὲν ἀπώλετο αὐταῖς βουλαῖς, σὺ δὲ τὰ ἐκείνου νῦν ἔχεις. ἐπεὶ δὲ ἁρμονίᾳ κολακευτικῇ ἄχθομαι, δοκεῖ τετμήσθω μοι ἥδε ἡ νευρὰ καὶ μηδὲν ἡγοῦ τῶν σῶν ἐντεθυμῆσθαί με.’ διὰ τούτων δὲ ὁμοῦ τὸν λόσοφον ὁ ὑπὲρ τῆς ἀληθείας παρίστησι λόγος, τοσαὔτα γὰρ πρότερον εἰπὼν κατὰ τοῦ 4Ζομετιανοῦ κολακεύει νῦν ὁ γεννάδας καὶ καθυποκρίνεται ὡς οὐδέν τι κατ᾽ αὐτοῦ, μᾶλλον δὲ ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ τῶν ### English translation (Claude) those who seemed good to the Fates. And to this he adds in his very syllables: “The one who is fated to become a carpenter will be a carpenter even if his hands are cut off; and the one fated to win the foot-race at Olympia will not miss the victory even if he is lamed in the leg; and the one to whom the Fates have granted mastery in archery will not miss the mark even if he loses his sight.” With these words he means the ruler, looking, surely, to the Acrisiuses and the Laiuses, Astyages the Mede, and many others who thought they were arranging such things well, who, thinking to kill children or grandsons, were deprived of their kingship by them, as they grew up against them out of obscurity together with what was fated … [And in the defence:] “… you were shut in by Vitellius, and the temple of Zeus on the brow of the city was burning, while he said his affairs would go well; … that you should not escape him, though you were a mere youth and he was not yet such; but nevertheless, since the Fates thought otherwise, he perished by his own counsels, and you now hold what was his. But since I am vexed by the harmony of flattery, let this string, if you please, be cut for me, and think that I have had no thought about your affairs.” Through these words the account of the truth exposes at once the philosopher. For after saying so much earlier against Domitian, the noble man now flatters him and pretends that nothing was said against him, or rather nothing for him, of ### Translation notes - Several lines of this page are lost or displaced in the OCR (the end of the passage on the Fates and the beginning of the quotation from the defence); the sense is given and the gaps marked “…”. Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 8.7.13–14 (quoted). Acrisius, Laius and Astyages tried to kill descendants foretold to overthrow them. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 405 (Kayser 1:405; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/405). ## Kayser p. 406 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/402/#p-406 - Source: Kayser 1:406 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius quotes Apollonius's secret plotting against Domitian and his words to Domitian's statue to show that his later flattery convicts him of servility and his biographers of falsehood. ### Greek text περὶ Μοιρῶν αὐτῷ καὶ ἀνάγκης ἐν Ἰωνίᾳ κεκινημένων. ἀνάλαβε δῆτα τὴν ἱστορίαν, ὦ συγγραφεῦ, καὶ τῆς μέθης διανήψας τὰ πρότερόν σοι γραφέντα λαμπρᾷ καὶ φιλαλήθει δέελθε τῇ φωνῇ, μηδὲν ὑποὁ στειλάμενος, ὡς ἐν ᾿Εφέσῳ διατρίβων,.,ἀφέστη Δομετιανοῦ τοὺς ἄνδρας καὶ ὑπὲρ τῆς ἁπάντων ἐρρώννυε σωτηρίας καὶ τὰς μὲν ἐπιστολιμαίους ὁμιλίας οὐκ ἀσφαλεῖς αὐτοῖς ᾧετο, τῶν δὲ ἑταίρων τοὺς σωφρονεστάτους ἄλλοτε ἄλλον ἀπολαμβάνων,.διά- κονον" ἔλεγε,,ποιοῦμαί σὲ ἀπορρήτου λαμπροῦ, βαδίσαι δέ σε χρὴ ἐς Ῥώμην παρὰ τὸν δεῖνα καὶ τὸν δεῖνα καὶ διαλεχθῆναί οἷ,’ καὶ (ὡς),.διελέγετο μὲν ὑπὲρ Μοιρῶν καὶ ἀνάγκης καὶ τὸν λόγον διήει, ὅτι μηδὲ οἱ τύραννοι τὰ Μοιρῶν οἷοι βιάξεσθαι,"" τὸ καὶ ὡς..χαλκῆς εἰκόνος ἱδρυμένης ΖΙομετιανοῦ πρὸς τῷ Μέλητι ἐπιστρέψας ἐς αὐτὴν τοὺς παρόντας »οἀνόητει. εἶπεν..ὡς πολὺ διαμαρτάνεις Μοιρῶν καὶ ἀνάγκης ᾧ γὰρ μετὰ σὲ τυραννεῦσαι πέπρωται, τοῦτον καὶ εἰ ἀποκτείνειας, ἀναβιώσεται.“ ὁ δὴ μετὰ τοὺς τοιουσδὶ λόγους κολακεύων τὸν τύραννον καὶ μηδέν τι τούτων ὡς πρὸς αὐτὸν εἰρῆσθαι αὑτῷ κατειρωνευόμενος πῶς οὐ μοχθηρίας ἁπάσης (ἂν) καὶ ἀνελευθερίας κφιθείη. εἰ μὴ ἄρα ψευδηγόφους τινὰς καὶ κατηγόρους τοῦ ἀνδρός, οὐχὶ δὲ ἀληθεῖς συγγφαφέας θεύη τις τοὺς ταῦτα μνήμῃ παραδεδωκότας; καὶ ποῦ τοῦ Φιλαλήθους..οἵ παιδεύσεως μὲν ἐπὶ πλεῖστον ἥκοντες. τὸ δ᾽ ἀληθὲς τιμῶντες συγγραφεῖς Ζάμις τε ὁ φιλόσοφος ὃ καὶ συνυδιατρέψας τῷ δηλουμένῳ καὶ Φιλόστφατος ὁ ᾿4θηναῖος,"' ἀφ᾽ ὧν ταῦτα παρατίθεται, οὗς σαφῶς οὕτως ἐναντιολογοῦντας κομπάξζοντάς τὲ ἀληθῶς καὶ τοῖς μαχομένοις παρισταμένους ψεύστας ἐναργῶς καὶ ἀπαι- ### English translation (Claude) what he had stirred up in Ionia about the Fates and necessity. Take up the history again, writer, and, sobering up from your drunkenness, go through what you wrote before in a clear and truth-loving voice, holding nothing back: how, while staying at Ephesus, “he turned the men away from Domitian and encouraged them for the safety of all; and thinking conversations by letter unsafe for them, he took aside now one, now another of the most prudent of his companions and said, ‘I make you a minister of a splendid secret: you must go to Rome to so-and-so and so-and-so and speak with him’”; and how “he discoursed about the Fates and necessity and went through the argument that not even tyrants can force what the Fates decree”; and how, “when a bronze statue of Domitian had been set up beside the Meles, turning the attention of those present to it, he said, ‘Foolish man, how greatly you mistake the Fates and necessity! For the one who is fated to be tyrant after you, even if you kill him, will come back to life.’” Then the man who after such words flatters the tyrant and pretends ironically that none of them was said by him against him, how would he not be judged guilty of all wickedness and servility? Unless one should consider those who have handed these things down to memory as false witnesses and accusers of the man, and not true writers. And where are the Lover of Truth's “writers who reached the highest point of education and honoured the truth, Damis the philosopher, who lived with him, and Philostratus of Athens,” from whom he takes these things, whom the light of truth has proved, contradicting themselves so plainly, truly boastful and siding with contradictions, to be clearly liars, unedu- ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 8.7.13 and 8.7.14 (Domitian's statue by the Meles; quoted). ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 406 (Kayser 1:406; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/406). ## Kayser p. 407 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/402/#p-407 - Source: Kayser 1:407 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius notes that the people of Lebadea refused Apollonius as a sorcerer, contrasts him with Pythagoras, Democritus and Plato, and turns to the uncertain accounts of his death. ### Greek text δεύτους καὶ γόητας τῆς ἀληθείας τὸ φέγγος διή- λεγξεν; ἐπὶ πᾶσι τὸν ᾿ἡπολλώνιον ἀπαλλαγέντα τοῦ δικαστηρίου ἐν Δεβαδείᾳ [ἐλθεῖν] ἱστορεῖ βουλόμενον εἰς Τροφωνίου κατελθεῖν μὴ ἐπιτρέπεσθαι 'πρὸς τῶν ἐπιχωρίων γόητα καὶ τούτων ἡγουμένων αὐτόν. καίτοι ἄξιον ἀπορῆσαι παραθέμενον τὰς ἐν ἀρχῇ τοῦ Φιλοστράτου λέξεις, ἐν αἷς ἀπορῶν, ὅτι δὴ γόητα αὐτὸν ὑπειλήφασιν αὐτὰ δὴ ταῦτα θαυμάξει λέγων ᾿Εμπεδοκλέα μὲν καὶ Πυθαγόραν καὶ Ζημόκριτον τοῖς αὐτοῖς μάγοις ὡμιληκότας οὔπω τὸ ὑπῆχθαι τέχνῃ, Πλάτωνά τε παρὰ τῶν ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ ἱερέων τε καὶ προφητῶν πολλὰ παρειληφότα καὶ ταῦτα τοῖς ἰδίοις ἀναμίξαντα λόγοις οὐδαμῶς δόξαι τισὶ μαγεύειν. τουτονὶ δὲ οὔπω γιγνώσπκεσθαι παρ᾽ ἀνθρώποις, ὅτι δὴ ἀπὸ τῆς ἀληθινῆς ὁρμῷτο σο- φίας. μάγον δὲ αὐτὸν πάλαι τε καὶ εἰσέτι νῦν νενομέσθαι τῷ μάγοις Βαβυλωνίων Ἰνδῶν τε Βραχμᾶσι καὶ τοῖς Αἰγυπτίων Γυμνοῖς ὡμιληκέναι. τέ δῆτα οὖν εἰρήσεται πρὸς αὐτόν; ὦ οὗτος, τῷδε τῷ ἀνδρὶ τί τοιοῦτο ἐπεχειρεῖτο, ὡς μόνον γόητα πάλαι τε καὶ εἰσέτι νῦν νενομέσθαι παρὰ τοὺς τηλικούτους ἄνδρας, οἱ τῶν αὐτῶν αὐτῷ, ὡς φής. διδασκάλων πεπειραμένοι διέπρεψαν μὲν καὶ καθ' οὖς ἐγνωρίζοντο χρόνους καὶ εἰς τοὺς μετέπειτα δὲ τῆς σφῶν φιλοσοφίας ἀοίδιμον καταλελοίπασι τὴν ἀρετήν, εἰ μὴ ἄρα πέρα τῶν προσηκόντων ἐγχειρῶν τοῖς εὖ φρονοῦσι φανερὸς καθειστήκει; αὐτίκα τῶν νῦν εἰσιν. οἱ περιέργους μηχανὰς τῇ τοῦ ἀνδρὸς ἀνακειμένας προσηγορίᾳ κατειληφέναι λέγουσιν. ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἔμοιγε τούτοις φίλον προσέχειν τὸν νοῦν, ἀλλὰ γὰρ καὶ περὶ τῆς τελευτῆς τἀνδρὸς ἀκόλουθα τοῖς προτέροις συντάττων οὐδὲν ἀληθὲς ἐξέφηνεν εἰδέναι, τοὺς μὲν ### English translation (Claude) cated and sorcerers? After all this he relates that Apollonius, released from the court, wishing at Lebadea to go down into the cave of Trophonius, was not allowed by the inhabitants, who considered him a sorcerer. Yet it is worth raising a difficulty, setting beside this the words of Philostratus at the beginning, in which, puzzled that men took him for a sorcerer, he wonders at this very thing, saying that Empedocles, Pythagoras and Democritus, who associated with the same magi, were never brought under that art, and that Plato, who received much from the priests and prophets in Egypt and mixed it into his own discourses, never seemed to anyone to practise magic; but that this man is not yet recognized among men as setting out from true wisdom, but was thought a magician long ago and still now because he associated with the Babylonian magi, the Brahmans of India and the Naked Ones of Egypt. What, then, shall be said to him? Sir, what was this man attempting, that he alone has been thought a sorcerer long ago and still now, in comparison with such great men, who, having tried, as you say, the same teachers, were distinguished in the times when they were known and have left to those after them the renowned virtue of their philosophy, unless, by attempting things beyond what is fitting, he had become evident to sensible men? Indeed there are some today who say they have come upon meddlesome devices dedicated under the man's name. But I do not care to attend to them. Moreover, in composing the account of the man's death consistently with what went before, he showed that he knew nothing true. Some, ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 8.19 (Trophonius), 1.2 (the reputation of a magician). Kayser's square brackets around ἐλθεῖν (“to go”) mark a word he deletes; it is left out. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 407 (Kayser 1:407; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/407). ## Kayser p. 408 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/402/#p-408 - Source: Kayser 1:408 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius exposes the conflicting accounts of Apollonius's death and bodily ascension, and begins to refute his fatalism from the soul's self-motion and responsibility. ### Greek text γὰρ ἐν ᾿Εφέσῳ τελευτῆσαι αὐτὸν ἱστορεῖν, τοὺς δὲ ἐν “ίνδῳ (παρελθόντα) ἐς τὸ ἱερὸν τῆς ᾿4θηνᾶς, ἄλλους δὲ ἐν Κρήτῃ, καὶ τοσαύτην ἄγνοιαν τοῦ περὶ αὐτὸν τέλους κατασκεδάσας βούλεται αὐτὸν ἐς οὐρανὸν αὐτῷ σώματι χωρῆσαι. ἐσδραμόντος γὰρ ἐς ἱερόν φησι κλεισθῆναι τὰς πύλας καὶ τινὰ δὴν ἀδόκητον παρθένων ἐχπεσεῦν, τὸ δὲ ἄσμα εἶναι" στεῖχε, στεῖχε ἐς οὐρανόν, στεῖχε." λέγει δέ, ὡς μήτε τάφῳ μήτε κενοταφέῳ τοῦ ἀνδρός πῶ περιτύ- χοι, καίτοι τῆς γῆς, ὁπόση ἐστίν, (φήσας) ἐπελθεῖν (πλείστην). καὶ βούλεται αὐτῷ ἡ διάνοια μηδὲ ὅλως θανάτου τὸν ἄνδρα θιγεῖν, πρότερον μὲν γὰρ ἀμφιβάλλων περὶ τοῦ τρόπου, καθ᾽ ὃν ἐτελεύτα, φησὺν οοδἴγε ἐτελεύτα,“ ὕστερον δὲ διαρρήδην καὶ ἐς οὐρα- νὸν αὐτὸν χωρῆσαι φάσκει. ὅθεν ὡς δὴ τοιοῦτον ὄντα καὶ κατὰ τὸ προοίμιον τῆς [ὅλης] γραφῆς καὶ καθ' ὅλην τὴν γραφὴν Πυθαγόρου καὶ Ἐμπεδοπλέους θειότερόν φησι προσεληλυθέναι φιλοσοφίᾳ. ᾿Αλλὰ γὰρ ἐν τούτοις περιγραφομένου τοῦ λόγου βραχέ᾽ ἄττα περὶ “Μοιρῶν καὶ εἱμαρμένης φέρε διαλάβωμεν, ὃ ὅ τι καὶ βούλοιτο δι᾽ ὅλης αὐτῷ τῆς ὑποθέσεως ὁ λόγος τὸ μὲν ἐφ᾽ ἡμῖν ἀναιρῶν, ἀνάγκην δὲ εἰσάγων καὶ εἱμαρμένην καὶ Μοίρας, διαθροῦντες, ταύτῃ γὰρ ἡμῖν ἐντελῶς καὶ ἡ ἐν δόγμασι ψευ- δοδοξία τἀνδρὸς διευθυνθήσεται. εἰ δὴ οὖν κατὰ τὸν τῆς ἀληθοῦς φιλοσοφίας λόγον ψυχὴ πᾶσα ἀθάνατος; τὸ γὰρ ἀεικένητον ἀθάνατον, τὸ δ᾽ ἄλλο κινοῦν καὶ ὑφ᾽ ἑτέρου κινούμενον παῦλαν ἔχον κινήσεως παῦλαν ἔχει ξῳῆς, καὶ αἰτέα ἑλομένου, θεὸς ἀναίτιος. τίς αἱρεῖ λόγος, ἄκουσαν, οὐχὶ δὲ κατὰ προαίρεσιν, ἀψύχου δίκην σώματος ἔξωθέν ποθεν κινουμένην καὶ ὡσπερεὶ νευροσπαστουμένην ὧδε, ### English translation (Claude) he says, report that he died at Ephesus, others at Lindus, having gone into the temple of Athena, others in Crete; and after scattering such ignorance about his end, he will have it that he went to heaven in his body. For he says that when he ran into a temple, the gates were shut, and an unexpected song of maidens burst out, and the song was: “Go, go to heaven, go.” He says that he never came upon a tomb or cenotaph of the man, though he went over most of the earth, as much of it as there is. And his mind wishes that death did not touch the man at all; for first, in doubt about the manner in which he died, he says “if he did die,” but later he states expressly that he went to heaven. Therefore, as being such, both in the preface of the writing and throughout it, he says he came to philosophy more divinely than Pythagoras and Empedocles. Since the account is coming to an end, come, let us discuss briefly the Fates and destiny, examining what the account means throughout its whole subject, abolishing what is in our power and introducing necessity, destiny and the Fates; for in this way the man's false opinion in doctrines too will be fully called to account. If, then, according to the account of true philosophy, every soul is immortal (for what is ever-moving is immortal, while what moves another and is moved by another, having a cessation of motion, has a cessation of life), and “the blame is the chooser's; God is blameless,” what argument proves that the ever-moving nature is led unwillingly and not by choice, like a soulless body moved from outside from somewhere and as it were pulled by strings this way ### Extrabiblical texts - Plato, Phaedr. 245c (Plato (works)): quotation, high confidence - Plato, Resp. 10.617e (Plato (works)): quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 8.30–31, 1.2. Plato, Phaedr. 245c (“every soul is immortal; for what is ever-moving is immortal”), and Resp. 10.617e (“the blame is the chooser's; God is blameless”), both quoted. Kayser's square brackets around ὅλης (“whole”) mark a word he deletes; it is left out. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 408 (Kayser 1:408; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/408). ## Kayser p. 409 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/402/#p-409 - Source: Kayser 1:409 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius argues that Apollonius's fatalism destroys praise and blame, his own censures of Euphrates and sorcerers, his praise of Pythagoras and the Brahmans, and his preaching of virtue. ### Greek text κἀκεῖσε τὴν ἀεικίνητον ἄγεσθαι φύσιν μηδὲν μηδαμῶς ἐξ ἰδίας ὁρμῆς καὶ κινήσεως ἐνεργοῦσαν, μηδὲ εἰς ἑαυτὴν τὴν τῶν δρωμένων ἀναφέρουσαν αἰτίαν ταύτῃ τὲ μήτε φιλοσοφοῦσαν ἐπαινετέαν τυγχάνειν μήτ᾽ αὖ ψεκτὴν κακίας ἔμπλεων καὶ πονηρίας; τί δῆτα οὖν “Εὐφράτῃ λοιδορούμενος καταμέμφῃ ὦ τᾶν. εἰ μὴ παρ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ, ἀλλ᾽ ἐξ εἱμαρμένης ἐπὶ τὸ κέρδος ἐκδούς, ὡς αὐτὸς ἀξιοῖς, ὠλιγώρει φιλοσοφίας; τί δὲ καὶ γόησιν ἐνυβρίζεις ψευδοσόφους ἀποκαλῶν ὑπὸ Μοιρῶν, ὡς ἡγῇ, καθελκομένους ἐπὶ τὸ. τὸν κακοδαίμονα βίον; τέ δὲ κακίαν ἁπλῶς ὀνομάἕξεις. καὶ πονηρός τις ἀνθρώπων οὐκ ἐν δίκῃ κρίνεται παρὰ σοὶ τὸν ἐξ ἀνάγκης εἴμαρμένον ἀποπληρῶν ὅρον; καὶ ἔμπαλιν τίνι λόγῳ Πυθαγόραν σεμνολογῶν θαυμαστὸν ἐπιγράφῃ διδάσκαλον, καὶ τὸ "Μοιρῶν παίγνιον, ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἐραστὴν ὄντα φιλοσοφίας οὐκ ἀπολείπεις ἐπαινῶν, Φραώτης δὲ καὶ Ἰάρχας (οἷ) ᾿Ινδῶν φιλόσοφοι τί μᾶλλον παρὰ σοὶ θεῶν ἀπηνέγκαντο δόξαν μηδέν τι παιδείας ἴδιον, μηδ᾽ ἀρετῆς ἀπενεγκάμενοι κλέος; Νέρωνος δ᾽ ὡσαύτως καὶ “ομετιανοῦ τί οὐχὶ Μοίραις καὶ ἀνάγκῃ τὴν ἀκόλαστον περιάπτεις ἀγερωχίαν πάσης αἰτίας καὶ παντὸς ἐγκλήματος ἐλευθερῶν τοὺς ἄνδρας; ἀλλὰ καὶ εἴ τῷ πέπρωται. ὡς φῇς. δρομικῷ καὶ τοξικῷ καὶ τεχτονικῷ, οὕτω δὴ καὶ εἰ γόητι τὸν τρόπον ὄντι μάγῳ ἀναφανῆναι μιαιφόνῳ τε καὶ πονηρῷ καὶ ἀκολάστῳ., πάντως που ἐξ ἀνάγκης τοιόσδε τις ἀποβήσεται. τί δῆτα οὖν περινοστῶν τοῖς μὴ οἵοις τὲ τυχεῖν διορθώσεως ἀρετὴν προκηρύττεις; ἢ τί καταξ μέμφῃ τοῖς τὴν μοῖραν, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ τὴν προαίρεσιν ἀτοπωτάτοις : τί δὲ καί, εἰ αὐτῷ σοι πέπρωτο θείῳ ὄντι τὴν φύσιν ὑπερᾶραι βασιλέων δόξης. εἰς διδα- ### English translation (Claude) and that, acting in nothing at all from its own impulse and motion, nor referring to itself the cause of what is done, and so being neither praiseworthy when it practises philosophy nor blameworthy when full of vice and wickedness? Why then, my good man, do you revile and blame Euphrates, if, giving himself up to gain not of himself but by destiny, as you think, he neglected philosophy? Why do you insult sorcerers, calling them false sages, when, as you think, they are dragged by the Fates to their wretched life? Why do you speak of vice at all? And why is any man judged wicked by you, and not justly, when he fulfils the limit fated by necessity? And conversely, by what reason do you solemnly name Pythagoras as your wonderful teacher, and never stop praising the plaything of the Fates, not a lover of philosophy? And why have Phraotes and Iarchas, the philosophers of the Indians, carried off with you the glory of gods, though they earned no fame of their own for education or virtue? And why do you not likewise attach to the Fates and necessity the licentious insolence of Nero and Domitian, freeing the men from all blame and every charge? Indeed, if it is fated, as you say, for a runner, an archer or a carpenter, so too, if it is fated for a man of the character of a sorcerer to appear a magician, murderous, wicked and licentious, surely he will turn out such of necessity. Why then do you go about proclaiming virtue to those who cannot be corrected? Or why do you blame those who are most absurd by fate and not by choice? And why, if it was fated for you, being divine in nature, to rise above the glory of kings, did you go to ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 409 (Kayser 1:409; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/409). ## Kayser p. 410 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/402/#p-410 - Source: Kayser 1:410 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius asks why a fated Apollonius needed teachers, sacrifices and prayers, and why he could avert a plague against destiny. ### Greek text σκάλων ἐφοίτας καὶ φιλοσόφων ᾿“ραβίους τε καὶ Ββυλωνίων μάγους καὶ σοφοὺς ᾿Ινδῶν ἐπολυπραγμόνεις; πάντως γάρ που καὶ τῆς τούτων δίχα κοινωνίας θεοῖς τὰ μελιττοῦτα καὶ τὸν λιβανωτὸν εἰς μάτην ῥιπτεῖς, εὐσέβειάν τε ἐπιμορφαζόμενος ἐπ᾽ εὐχὰς τρέπεσθαι τοὺς ἑταίρους παρορμᾷς; αὐτός τὲ εὐχόμένος τί παρὰ θεῶν αἰτεῖς, ὁπότε καὶ τούτων ὁμολογεῖς τὴν εἱμαρμένην κρατεῖν; καὶ μὴν ἔδει τοὺς ἄλλους θεοὺς παραμειψάμενον ᾿άνάγκῃ μόνον καὶ “Μοίραις θύειν καὶ τοῦ Διὸς αὐτοῦ μᾶλλον τὴν εἵμαρἕνην προτιμᾶν. οὕτω δ᾽ ἄν σοι θεοὶ μὲν οὐκέτ᾽ ἂν ἦσαν καὶ εἰκότως, ἅτε μηδὲ ἀνθρώπους οἷοί τε ἁλῶναι λοιμῷ πολίτας, τί τἀναντία νομοθετῶν παραχρούῃ τὴν εἱμαρμένην; μᾶλλον δὲ πῶς ὑπερῆρας τὴν Μοῖραν, τρόπαιον ὥσπερ κατ᾽ αὐτῆς ἀράμενος; μενος τῷ μίτῳ τὸν ἄτρακτον, ζωοποιὸς αὐτῇ παραἦγον. οὔτι πω φήσεις κατ᾽ ἀξίαν, πολλοῦ γε καὶ δεῖ. ὃς πρὸ τῆς εἰς τοῦτο τὸ σῶμα παρόδου τῶν ἐν θαλάττῃ καὶ κύμασι διατριβόντων γεγονέναι σεαυοὔκουν θαυμάσιος οὔτε τῆς πρώτης γενέσεως καὶ τροφῆς, οὔτε τῆς ἐγκυκλίου παιδείας. οὔτε τῆς ἐν ἀκμῇ σώφρονος ἀγωγῆς, οὔτ᾽ ἀσκήσεως τῆς ἐν φιλοσοφίᾳ, ἦν δ᾽ ἄρα τις Μοιρῶν ἀνάγκη καὶ εἰς Βα- βυλωνίους ἐλαύνουσα, ὠθούμενος δ᾽ ὥσπερ καὶ τοῖς Γυμνοὺς οὐχ ἡ προαίρεσις, οὐδ᾽ ὁ φιλοσοφίας πόθος. ### English translation (Claude) teachers and philosophers, and busy yourself with the Arabs, the magi of the Babylonians and the wise men of the Indians? For surely without sharing with these too you would have reached it. Why do you throw honey-cakes and frankincense to the gods in vain, and, putting on a show of piety, urge your companions to turn to prayers? And when you pray, what do you ask of the gods, when you admit that destiny rules even them? You ought rather to pass by the other gods and sacrifice only to Necessity and the Fates, and honour destiny above Zeus himself. So for you there would be no more gods, and rightly, since they could not even … [save] men … citizens … from plague. Why do you legislate the opposite and strike against destiny? Or rather, how did you rise above Fate, raising a trophy as it were against it? … [You will not say that] … the spindle with the thread … life-giving to it … not at all deservedly, far from it, you who say you were, before your coming into this body, one of those who spend their lives on the sea and the waves … So you were not wonderful by your first birth and nurture, nor by your general education, nor by your temperate conduct in your prime, nor by your training in philosophy; it was some necessity of the Fates that drove you to the Babylonians, and pushed you, as it were, to the Naked Ones; not choice, nor longing for philosophy. ### Translation notes - Several lines of this page are scrambled or lost in the OCR (on the plague and the spindle of the Fates); the sense is given where it can be and the gaps marked “…”. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 410 (Kayser 1:410; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/410). ## Kayser p. 411 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/402/#p-411 - Source: Kayser 1:411 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius shows that fatalism erases all difference between wise and foolish, just and unjust, and proclaims that under God's providence each man is lord of his own choices. ### Greek text Μοῖρα δὲ ἦγεν ἄγχουσα καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ Γάδειρα καὶ τὰς περιστρέφεσθαι. εἰ δὲ δὴ μετειληφέναι τι σοφίας αὐτὸν ἐκ τούτων εἴποι τις, Μοῖρα καὶ τούτων αἰτία ἀλλὰ κατὰ ἀνάγκην αὐτῷ πορισθείδης φιλοσοφίας. γόρας αὐτὸς καί τι τερατῶδες καὶ ἀπερριμμένον ἀνδράποδον, Σωκράτης αὐτὸς φιλοσοφίας ὑπεραποθνήσκων καὶ οἱ τοῦτον θανάτου ἄξιον γραψάμενοι, Διογένης τε καὶ τὰ ᾿Αθηναίων μειράκια, καὶ ἁπλῶς εἰπεῖν ὃ σοφώτατος οὐκ ἂν διαφέροι τοῦ ἀφρονεστάτου καὶ ὁ ἀδικώτατος τοῦ δικαιοτάτου ὃ τε ἀκολαστότατος τοῦ σωφρονεστάτου καὶ ὁ δειλότατος τοῦ ἀνδρειοτάτου εἱμαρμένης καὶ Μοιρῶν παιγνίων τού- τῶν ἁπάντων ἀποδεδειγμένων. ἀλλὰ γὰρ πρὸς ταῦτα τῆς ἀληθείας ὁ κῆρυξ ἀναβοήσεται λέγων ὦ ἄνθρώποι, θνητὸν καὶ ἐπίκηρον γένος, ποῖ δὴ φέρεσθε τὸν τῆς ἀγνωσίας ἄκρατον ἐμπιόντες; λήξατε ποτὲ καὶ διανήψατε τῆς μέθης καὶ διανοίας ὀρθοῖς ὄμμασι τὸ σεμνὸν τῆς ἀληθείας ἐνοπτρίσασθε πρόσωπον. οὐ θέμις ἀλήθειαν πολεμεῖν ἑαυτῇ καὶ μάχεσθαι, οὐδὲ δυοῖν ἐναντιωτάτοιν μίαν ὑφεστάναι καὶ τὴν αὐτὴν αἰτίαν. τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ προνοίας τὰ πάντα κρατούσης θείοις νόμοις διατέτακται τὸ πᾶν, ἀνθρώπων τε ψυχῆς ὅρος αὐτοκράτορα τε καὶ κριτὴν ἡγεμόνα τε καὶ κύριον αὐτὸν ἑαυτοῦ καθίστησι φυσικοῖς νόμοις καὶ φιλοσόφων δόγμασιν ἐκδιδάσκων, ### English translation (Claude) It was Fate that led him by the throat to Gades and … to wander about. If anyone says that he gained some wisdom from these, Fate is the cause of this too, … the philosophy furnished to him by necessity. … [Pytha]goras himself and some monstrous and cast-off slave, Socrates himself dying for philosophy and those who indicted him as worthy of death, Diogenes and the youths of Athens; and in a word the wisest would not differ from the most foolish, nor the most unjust from the most just, nor the most licentious from the most temperate, nor the most cowardly from the bravest, all these having been shown to be playthings of destiny and the Fates. But to this the herald of truth will cry out, saying: O men, mortal and perishable race, where are you being carried, having drunk the unmixed wine of ignorance? Stop at last, sober up from your drunkenness, and with the straight eyes of the mind look at the solemn face of truth. It is not right for truth to war with itself and fight, nor for one and the same cause to underlie two things most contrary. While the providence of God rules all things, the universe is ordered by divine laws; and the limit of the soul of men makes each man ruler and judge, leader and lord of himself, teaching this by natural laws and by the doctrines of philosophers, ### Translation notes - The first lines of this page are scrambled in the OCR (lines from different places run together); the sense is given and the gaps marked “…”. Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 4.47–5.10 (Gades). ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 411 (Kayser 1:411; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/411). ## Kayser p. 412 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/402/#p-412 - Source: Kayser 1:412 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius distinguishes what is and is not in our power, declares that the cause of actions lies in choice and not in Fate, and condemns consistent fatalism as atheism and inconsistent fatalism as folly. ### Greek text κατὰ προαΐρεσίν τὲ καὶ πρᾶξιν, ἃ καὶ φύσει ἐλεύ-θεέρα ἀκώλυτα ἀπαρεμπόδιστα τυγχάνει, τὰ δὲ οὐκ ἐφ᾽ ἡμῖν ἀσθενῆ δοῦλα κωλυτὰ ἀλλότρια, ἃ καὶ περὶ τὸ σῶμα καὶ τὰ ἐχτὸς ἄψυχά τε ὄντα καὶ ἄλογα καὺ πάντῃ τῆς ἰδίας τοῦ λογικοῦ ξῴου φύσεως ἀλλοτρίαν τὴν ὑπόστασιν ἔχει. τῶν δ᾽ ἐφ᾽ ἡμῖν τὴν ἐπὶ θάτερα ὁρμὴν ἀρετῆς τε καὶ κακίας ἕκαστος ἐν αὐτῇ κέχτηται προαιρέσει, καὶ τὸ μὲν τῶν ὅλων δεσπόξζον τὲ καὶ ἡγεμονοῦν εὐθέως περαίνει κατὰ φύσιν περι- πορευόμενον, τῷ δ᾽ αἰεὶ συνέπεται δίκη τῶν ἀπολειπομένων τοῦ θείου νόμου τιμωρός, τῶν δ᾽ ἐπὶ τὰς πράξεις ὁρμῶν οὐ Μοίρας, οὐδὲ εἱμαρμένης, οὐδ᾽ ἀνάγκης αἰτία᾽ αἰτία ἑλομένου, θεὸς ἀναίτιος. εἰ δὴ θρασύνοιτό τις τῷ ἐφ᾽ ἡμῖν ἀντιπολεμῶν. μὴ παρακαλυπτέσθω οὗτος᾽ ἀθεότητα ἀναφανδὸν διεξἀγορευέτω μὴ πρόνοιαν, μὴ θεόν, μηδέ τι ἄλλο πλὴν Μοιρῶν καὶ ἀνάγκης ὁμολογῶν, καὶ τὰ ἀκόλουθα τούτοις γυμνῇ προσκαταλεγέτω κεφαλῇ, μὴ σοφόν, μὴ ἄφρονα, μὴ δίκαιον, μὴ ἄδικον, μὴ ἐν- ἄρετον, μὴ φαῦλον. μὴ γόητα, μὴ θεῖον ἐν ἀνθρώπῶν γίνεσθαι φύσει, μὴ φιλοσοφίαν εἶναι, μὴ παιδείαν., μηδ᾽ ὅλως τέχνην τινά, μηδὲ ἐπιστήμην, μή τινα ἄλλον τὴν φύσιν ἀγαθὸν ἢ πονηρὸν ἀποκαλείτω; πάντα δὲ συλλήβδην ἀνάγκῃ καὶ Μοιρῶν ἀτφάκτοις περιδινεῖσθαι. ἄθεος δῆτα καὶ δυσσεβὴς οὗτος ἐν εὐσεβῶν καὶ ἐν φιλοσόφων ἀπογεγράφθω κριτηρίῳ, εἰ δ᾽ ἐπικαλυπτόμενος ἕτερα δοξάζειν ἐπιχειροῖ πρόνοιαν καὶ θεούς, Μοῖραν δ᾽ ἐπὶ τούτοις καὶ εἱμαρμένην τις ἀνακηρύττοι᾽ μαχομένοις καὶ ἐναντίοις παριστάμενος δόγμασιν, ἐν ἄφφοσι δίκην ἀνοίας παρασχὼν καταγεγράφθω. ταυτὶ μὲν οὖν ταύτῃ. εἰ δ᾽ ἐπὶ τούτοις ἐν φιλοσόφων διατριβαῖς ### English translation (Claude) in choice and action, which by nature are free, unhindered, unimpeded; while the things not in our power are weak, servile, hindered, alien, namely those concerning the body and external things, which are soulless and irrational and have an existence wholly foreign to the proper nature of a rational living being. Of the things in our power, each has in his own choice the impulse to one side or the other, to virtue or to vice; and that which masters and governs the universe goes straight on its way according to nature, while justice always follows it as avenger of those who fall short of the divine law; and of the impulses toward actions neither the Fates, nor destiny, nor necessity is the cause: “the blame is the chooser's; God is blameless.” If anyone should be so bold as to war against what is in our power, let him not veil himself, but proclaim his atheism openly, confessing neither providence, nor God, nor anything else but the Fates and necessity; and let him with bare head add the consequences of these: that there is no wise man, no fool, no just man, no unjust, no virtuous, no wicked, no sorcerer, nothing divine arising in human nature, no philosophy, no education, no art at all, no science; let him call no one good or bad by nature, but say that all things together are whirled about by Necessity and the spindles of the Fates. Let such a man be enrolled as godless and impious in the court of the pious and of philosophers. But if, veiling himself, he tries to hold other opinions, and proclaims providence and gods, and besides these Fate and destiny, siding with conflicting and contrary doctrines, let him be enrolled among the senseless, paying the penalty for folly. So much for this. If, after this, among the schools of philosophers ### Extrabiblical texts - Plato, Resp. 10.617e (Plato (works)): quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - The distinction between things in our power, “free, unhindered, unimpeded,” and things not in our power, “weak, servile, hindered, alien,” is quoted from Epictetus, Ench. 1.2 (no extrabiblical id exists for Epictetus). Plato, Resp. 10.617e, quoted again. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 412 (Kayser 1:412; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/412). ## Kayser p. 413 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/402/#p-413 - Source: Kayser 1:413 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eusebius concludes that Apollonius may be counted a philosopher if stripped of Philostratus's fables, but that to deify him is only to convict him of sorcery. ### Greek text ἀξιοῖεν ἔτι καταλέγειν τινὲς τὸν ἄνδρα, λελέξεται, ὡς ἄρα εἰ ἀποκαθήρειαν τῆς ἔξωθεν λύμης, ἀτὰρ καὶ τῆς ἀπὸ τῆσδε τῆς γραφῆς ἐπεισκυκλουμένης αὐτῷ σκευῆς, φθόνος πᾶς αὐτοῖς ἐκποδὼν ἂν εἴη; ὅρους δ᾽ εἰ ἀληθείας προϊών τις ἱπὲρ φιλοσόφους ἐκθειάξειν αὐτὸν πειρῷτο, λάθοι ἂν αὐτῷ γόητος ἀτεχνῶς διαβολὴν ἐπεντρίβων, ὡς ταυτὶ τὰ συγγοάμματα σοφιστικῶς ἀναπεπλασμένα οὐδὲν πλὴν ἐλέγχου καὶ δεινῆς τἀνδρὸς διαβολῆς παρὰ τοῖς νοῦν ἔχουσιν ἔμοιγε δοκεῖ περιέχειν. ### English translation (Claude) some should still think it right to count the man, it will be said that if they purged him of the defilement from outside, and of the trappings brought in upon him from this writing, all envy would be removed from them. But if anyone, going beyond the limits of truth, should try to deify him above the philosophers, he would fail to notice that he was simply rubbing into him the charge of sorcery; for these writings, sophistically fabricated, contain, it seems to me, nothing but a refutation and terrible slander of the man in the eyes of those who have sense. ### Citation (SBL) Eusebius, Hier. 413 (Kayser 1:413; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/eusebius-contra-hieroclem/413).