No pretended worship and no likeness of God
Not only is it foolish to pray “to images”; it is foolish also to go along with the multitude and pretend to pray “to images”, as those do who follow the philosophy of the Peripatetics, and those who embrace the views of Epicurus or Democritus. For nothing counterfeit should dwell in the soul of one who is truly devout toward the divine. We do not honour images for this reason also: so that, as far as it depends on us, we may not sink into the notion that the images are other gods. That is why we also find fault with Celsus and with all who admit that these are not gods: because those who are reputed to be wise give even the outward show of honour to images. The multitude follow that show, and they not only sin, supposing that they worship the images by way of accommodation, but even sink in their souls into thinking that these are gods, and cannot bear even to hear that the things they bow down to are not gods.
Celsus, then, says that these are regarded not as gods but as the gods’ votive offerings; but he does not show how they are not men’s offerings rather than, as he named them, offerings of the gods themselves. For it is clear that these are the offerings of men who have gone astray about the divine. Nor do we suppose that the images are divine likenesses, since we do not sketch a form of the invisible and bodiless God.
Celsus supposes that we contradict ourselves when we say that the divine is not of human form and yet believe that “God made man” his own “image”, and made him in the image of God (Genesis 1:27; 9:6). To this we must say, as was said also earlier, that we hold that what is “according to the image of God” (Genesis 1:27) is preserved in the rational soul that is shaped by virtue. Here, indeed, Celsus, not seeing the difference between the image of God and what is “according to the image of God”, says that we say “God made man” his own “image” and a form like himself. But this too has been answered earlier.
Greek
Καὶ οὐ μόνον τὸ εὔχεσθαι „τοῖς ἀγάλμασιν“ ἠλίθιόν ἐστιν ἀλλὰ γὰρ καὶ τὸ συμπεριφερόμενον τοῖς πολλοῖς προσποιεῖσθαι „τοῖς ἀγάλμασιν“ εὔχεσθαι, ὁποῖον ποιοῦσιν οἱ τὰ ἀπὸ τοῦ Περιπάτου φιλοσοφοῦντες καὶ οἱ τὰ Ἐπικούρου ἢ Δημοκρίτου ἀσπαζόμενοι· οὐδὲν γὰρ νόθον χρὴ ἐνυπάρχειν ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ τοῦ ἀληθῶς εἰς τὸ θεῖον εὐσεβοῦς. οὐ τιμῶμεν δὲ τὰ ἀγάλματα καὶ διὰ τὸ μὴ τὸ ὅσον ἐφ᾿ ἡμῖν καταπίπτειν εἰς ὑπόληψιν τὴν περὶ τοῦ εἶναι τὰ ἀγάλματα θεοὺς ἑτέρους. διὸ καὶ ἐγκαλοῦμεν Κέλσῳ καὶ πᾶσι τοῖς ὁμολογοῦσι μὴ εἶναι ταῦτα θεοὺς ὅτι τῶν δοκούντων εἶναι σοφῶν καὶ ἡ φαινομένη περὶ τὰ ἀγάλματα τιμή· ᾗ καὶ ἀκολουθοῦντες οἱ πολλοὶ οὐ μόνον κατὰ συμπεριφορὰν σέβειν αὐτὰ νομίζοντες ἁμαρτάνουσιν ἀλλὰ γὰρ καὶ καταπίπτοντες τῇ ψυχῇ ἐπὶ τὸ νομίζειν ταῦτα εἶναι θεοὺς καὶ μηδ᾿ ἀνεχόμενοι ἀκούειν ὅτι οὐκ εἰσὶ ταῦτα θεοὶ τὰ ὑπ᾿ αὐτῶν προσκυνούμενα. Κέλσος μὲν οὖν φησιν αὐτὰ μὴ ἡγεῖσθαι θεοὺς ἀλλὰ θεῶν ἀναθήματα, μὴ ἀποδεικνὺς. πῶς οὐκ ἀνθρώπων εἰσὶ ταῦτα ἀναθήματα ἀλλ᾿, ὡς ὠνόμασεν, αὐτῶν τῶν θεῶν. σαφὲς γὰρ ὅτι ἐστὶν ἀνθρώπων πεπλανημένων περὶ τὸ θεῖον ταῦτα ἀναθήματα. ἀλλ᾿ οὐδὲ θείας εἰκόνας ὑπολαμβάνομεν εἶναι τὰ ἀγάλματα, ἅτε μορφὴν ἀοράτου καὶ ἀσωμάτου μὴ διαγράφοντες θεοῦ. ἐπεὶ δὲ ὑπολαμβάνει ἡμᾶς ὁ Κέλσος τοῖς ἐναντίοις περιπίπτειν, ὅτε φαμὲν μὴ εἶναι ἀνθρωπόμορφον τὸ θεῖον καὶ ὅτε πιστεύομεν ὅτι „ὁ θεὸς ἐποίησε τὸν ἄνθρωπον“ ἰδίαν „εἰκόνα“ καὶ ἐν εἰκόνι θεοῦ ἐποίησεν αὐτόν· λεκτέον, ὡς καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἀνωτέρω εἴρηται, ὅτι τὸ „κατ᾿ εἰκόνα θεοῦ“ ἐν ψυχῇ λογικῇ, τῇ ποιᾷ κατ᾿ ἀρετὴν, σῴζεσθαί φαμεν. καὶ ἔνθα μέντοι ὁ Κέλσος, μὴ ἰδὼν διαφορὰν εἰκόνος θεοῦ καὶ τοῦ „κατ᾿ εἰκόνα θεοῦ,“ φησὶν ἡμᾶς λέγειν ὅτι „ὁ θεὸς ἐποίησε τὸν ἄνθρωπον“ ἰδίαν „εἰκόνα“ καὶ εἶδος ὅμοιον ἑαυτῷ· εἴρηται δὲ ἐν τοῖς ἀνωτέρω καὶ πρὸς ταῦτα.