wherein all the reason and philosophy of atheism is confuted, and

5 2 8 7^^ Egyptians alfo reduced B oo k I.OV f c«V ^either Julian or Apukius \ fo do we think it not unworthy our obfervationhere, that the very fame docflrine is, by Celfus^ imputed alfo to the EgyptianTheologers, as pretending to worfhip brute animals no otherwife than afy'^bols of thofe eternal Ideas •,(?>v(r»' yi riy-S; rm f/.iv AlyuTrVm nccltxyexiv^TToAXoi) ^u'uv i'pttjj.t^iuv Ti^uac fi'vari tk Toi^tlTfl! SiSxcr-Kunnv Celfus alfo addeth, //{'tffwf Chrijlians deride the Egyptians without caufe, they having many myjleriesin their religion, for as much as they prcfefs^ that pcrijhing brute animals arenotworjhippedbythetn, but the eternal ideas. According to which of Celfusit fhould feem, that this docftrine of eternal ideas, as the paradigms andpatterns of all things here below in this fenfible world, was not proper toPlato, nor the Greeks, but common with them to the Egyptians alfo. Whicheternal ideas, however fuppofed to have been generated from that firfl: divinehypoftafis of the Platonick and Egyptian trinity, and called intelligible gods,were neverthelefs acknowledged by them, all to exift in one divine intelledt,according to that of Plotinus % «'x e^w t» db ra, norflac^ That the intelligibles exijlno where of themfelves, without Mind or IntelleSl ; which Mind or Intellectbeing the fecond divine hypoftaffs, thefe intelligible and invifible gods, (howevergenerated from God} yet are therefore faid by Julian, in his book a-gainft the Chriftians, both to co-exift with God, and to in-exift in him. Toj». '47. which purpofe alfo is this other paflage of Julian'^ in his fixth oration,ira.v\oi, yot^P K^Tog eOv, enrep Yj \v lauTw xai issxp laulu i'/fi^ twu oVoirai/ tii~«»%? Si x«i jwEvxVaf a£i, a'lxai tstoi? EifTiu aiTi'«j -rri; cciiyvjia-iaf. For God istill things, forafmuch as he contai7ieth within himfelf, the caufes of all things,that any way are ; whether of immortal things immortal ; or of con-uptible andperifhing things, not corruptible but eternal alfo, and always remaining ; whichthereforeare the caufes of their perpetual generation, and new produ^ion. Nowthefe caufes of all things contained in God are no other than the divine Ideas.Wherefore, from hence it plainly appears, that thefe Platonick and EgyptianPacrans, who thus reduced their multiplicity of Gods to the divine ideas,did not therefore make them to be fo many minds or fpirits, really diftinftfrom the fupreme God, (though dependent on him too) but indeed only fomany partial confiderations of one God, as being all things, that is, containingwithin himfdf the caufes of all things. And accordingly we find inOr c. Celf. f.-Origen, that, as the Egyptian Theologers called their religious animals, fym-^°'-bols of die eternal ideas, fo did they alfo call them fymbols of God. T« tuvAi'V'J'SJ'I'iov (7£u.voAoj/svIwv xai Ta Trtfi ruv dXoyicv ^uav, axt (pct.c-y.6'JluM shxi rtvz kvtcc^a'l ©:? c"jjw.?oAa- Celfiis applduds Ihe Egyptian Theologers talkingfo magnificenilyand myflerioujly of thofe brute animals worffjipped by them, and affirming them /*he certain fymbols of God.And now we have given forae account of the Polyonymy of the one fupremeGod, in the theologies of the Pagans ; or of his being called by many proper,,perfonal names, carrying with them an appearance of fo many fcveral Gods.Firft, that God had many feveraJ names beftowed upon him, from manydifferent» Enncad. V. Lib. V. p. jt?.