Acosta contradicts; if barbarians knew resurrection it was by tradition; Seneca, Phocylides, Plato

Yet these authors contradict Joseph Acosta, praised by us above. But if anything concerning resurrection was believed by the barbarians, it must be established that it was passed down to them through tradition, as though from their ancestors, just as the opinion concerning the flood, which was not itself utterly unknown. See the notes on Benzoni book 1, chapter 10. And indeed if we refer knowledge of such mysteries to nothing other than the traditions of the ancestors, it is certainly less wonderful that Seneca in letter 36 alludes to resurrection. And what would be said by a Christian concerning resurrection more expressly and rightly than what is transcribed under Phocylides' name? Which poem Joseph Scaliger in the Eusebian Animadversions number 1480 judged not to be of that most ancient Phocylides, but of some Alexandrian Hellenist, or — what he thinks nearer the truth — of some Christian. Eusebius also (Preparation for the Gospel book 11, chapter 11) tries to persuade that the resurrection of the dead was known to Plato: but it is more probable that he alluded not so much to the resurrection believed by us as to the παλιγγενεσία and ἀποκατάστασις such as the Platonists invent when the great year is completed.