50. How was it then ?—How, that those who contended about these things, had no God; when, behold ! there was a multitude of Deities among them ?—since that of Delphos⁹⁰, and that of Lebadia⁹¹, was (each) a Diviner? —that of Colophon⁹² gave responses?—'that of Miletus⁹³ was also a Diviner ?—and another was crying out from another quarter ? Nevertheless, not even one of these could so teach these wise men, that they could apprehend the truth ! All of them too worshipped these, as did their Fathers; and all the Greeks confessed, that they were gods: yet, they were not the more assisted in the discovery of the doctrines which are divine; when, behold! there was nothing hindering them from being forthwith (so) instructed in the truth, (or) from availing themselves of the Gods, who were on the earth and at hand, as (their) Teachers. Nor should they have injured, and reviled one another ; but, should have ceased from dispute, and have enquired of the Gods about the matters of contention; and so have learned the truth, as it were from Physicians, and (thence) have received advantage. And first, it was

the duty of the school of Epicurus to have learned not to be godless, and not to have subjected themselves to "Rest"⁹⁴ (as the chief good) : nor so to have infatuated themselves with ridiculous (notions), as to ascribe to subtile and indivisible bodies⁹⁵ the power of making the universe; but to have persuaded themselves from the Gods, when (so) taught of the things respecting them. It was also the duty of the school of Aristotle,—who saw with their own eyes the Temples, Fanes, and Idols (that were) on earth : not one (only) but myriads (of these), in every city and place,—to have examined them as to their power: and, from the fact, no more to have confined their discussions about Providence, either to the (regions) above the heavens, or even to (those) above the moon⁹⁶; but, to have persuaded themselves, that there were Gods also on the earth, and that they exercised a providential care over the men among whom they resided. And, as it was in their power to learn from these same their own (Deities), they should no more have contended with those that were arrayed against them, as to whether the soul was mortal, or immortal. They should therefore, have asked the God who was at hand, and (so) have received, as from the Gods, the true decision (of this question). Thus also, (it was the duty) of the Stoics; and thus too, of the Platonists: thus also, of the Sceptics who are termed Pyrrhonists : and thus also, of those who were in former times styled the Philosophers of Physics, that they should not have desisted from inquiry as to the truth, nor have supposed, as those do who play at chess, that every thing coming into their mind was truth. They should, on the contrary, have asked the Gods who were residing among them about every thing that was unknown: but not even one of the Wise Men has done this, nor did it even

enter his mind! Was it then, that they were godless, and evil-minded towards the Gods, that (the task) was unwelcome to them, and (that) they acted thus ? But, thus were they all at once godless; and the Philosophers appear to have been particularly so, and much more wicked than those who were unintellectual: those (I say), who made it no unwelcome task to enquire of the Gods about the taking of wives; the taking of a journey; blindness, or the infirmity of the body :—these too, were readily heard: and to those, who so sought did (the Gods), not in.vidiously, give their divinations. But, behold! it was any thing but becoming in the wise, to have enquired of those Gods who were among them, and to whom they rendered worship and honour, respecting their bodies (only) ; but not about the healing of their souls. And, as not even one of these marvellous Philosophers did this ; it remains, that we assure ourselves of one of two things; (viz.) Either, that these men were no Philosophers; or, that those (Deities) were no Gods. For if, when (these) were really Gods, they set them at nought; they were no Philosophers, but were fools and ignorant men: but, if they had in truth made any approach to the love of wisdom, and abounded in knowledge more than the many; it is clear that they would, with pure conscience, have laughed at the folly of the many ; and it is likely (they did so).