It will not be difficult to refute the objections raised at the beginning. First, it is easy to understand that the Lord rejects not those who were sent but those who came—either false prophets or false philosophers. “I did not send them,” he says, “but they ran of their own accord.” Above, I think, we argued sufficiently that true philosophers were provided by divine providence. Clement next maintains that the philosophers of Greece were called thieves for another reason: after stealing wisdom from Moses and the prophets, they were accustomed to boast of it as their own, in pursuit of empty glory. Pythagoras was a disciple of a certain Jew from Nazareth, as Alexander writes in libro de symbolis Pythagoricis. St. Ambrose also clearly reports that Pythagoras was Hebrew by birth. Clement of Alexandria attests that he was circumcised. Clearchus the Peripatetic, in primo libro de somno, says that he knew a certain Jew, most distinguished not only in speech but also in character, with whom Aristotle had spent time. Augustine and Clement attest that Plato received his teaching not only from Pythagoras but also from our people, and Ambrose supports this with many arguments. Plato himself openly admits as much in Timaeo. Therefore, when we incorporate into our discussions what the philosophers rightly and wisely said, we are taking back what is ours, not borrowing what belongs to others. That is enough about the first argument. The rest are such that we would weary the reader by refuting them.