Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IV/Origen/Origen Against Celsus/Book I/Chapter LXX

Chapter LXX.

He asserts, moreover, that &#8220;the body of a god is not nourished with such food (as was that of Jesus),&#8221; since he is able to prove from the Gospel narratives both that He partook of food, and food of a particular kind.&#160; Well, be it so.&#160; Let him assert that He ate the passover with His disciples, when He not only used the words, &#8220;With desire have I desired to eat this passover with you,&#8221; but also actually partook of the same.&#160; And let him say also, that He experienced the sensation of thirst beside the well of Jacob, and drank of the water of the well.&#160; In what respect do these facts militate against what we have said respecting the nature of His body?&#160; Moreover, it appears indubitable that after His resurrection He ate a piece of fish; for, according to our view, He assumed a (true) body, as one born of a woman.&#160; &#8220;But,&#8221; objects Celsus, &#8220;the body of a god does not make use of such a voice as that of Jesus, nor employ such a method of persuasion as he.&#8221;&#160; These are, indeed, trifling and altogether contemptible objections.&#160; For our reply to him will be, that he who is believed among the Greeks to be a god, viz., the Pythian and Didymean Apollo, makes use of such a voice for his Pythian priestess at Delphi, and for his prophetess at Miletus; and yet neither the Pythian nor Didymean is charged by the Greeks with not being a god, nor any other Grecian deity whose worship is established in one place.&#160; And it was far better, surely, that a god should employ a voice which, on account of its being uttered with power, should produce an indescribable sort of persuasion in the minds of the hearers.