He says that “the Jews, { 5a} who were originally fugitive slaves from Egypt, pretended, on the authority of the Books of Moses, to a very ancient genealogy; { 5b} that they lived together in a corner of Palestine, in profound ignorance; { 5c} not having heard of the things long before celebrated by Hesiod, and many other men divinely inspired.” He then particularizes much of the history of Genesis, which he calls “an old woman’s story, full of impiety;” { 6a} and asserts that “many of its facts are taken from the heathens.” To this Origen { 6b} replies by referring to Josephus { 6c} and Tatian { 6d} for external proof of the history of the Jews: He affirms that they have all the evidence of their existence which other nations have, { 6e} that they have records which others have not; { 6f} that other nations are allowed to have existed who bear testimony to the Jews; { 6g} that it would have been impossible for so small a band, to have opposed itself to the whole power of Egypt; that it must have changed its language; and that, in changing, it has not assumed one resembling the neighbouring nations. He then urges the wisdom of the Jewish Institutions; infers from their perfect preservation, the esteem in which they were held; and challenges a comparison, { 7a} as to sublimity of doctrine, and purity of morals, with any other system, proposed to mankind.
Celsus then notices many of the Old Testament characters: He ridicules the relation of “the Fall, { 7b} the Deluge, Children born of old Persons, Brothers who kill each other, Mothers who deceive, the Sin of Lot, the Animosity of Esau, the Deceit of the Sons of Jacob, the History of Joseph,” &c. Origen replies that such facts alone are selected by Celsus from the writings of Moses, as supply a ground of attack; that the simplicity of his narration proves the integrity of its author; and he then apologizes for these causes of offence by the necessity of the case, he contrasts with them the greater profligacy of the heathen, or fancifully explains them upon the scheme of allegory.
No direct admission of Celsus, relating to Jewish prophecy, is to be found. There are however many observations, which prove the coming of Christ to have been expected by the Jews, and this expectation must have been the result of prophecy. The remarks of Celsus, with regard to this topic, are of this kind. That the “Jews { 8a} and Christians believe, that the Spirit of God had promised there would come a Saviour; but they could not agree, whether or no, he had already come;” { 8b} that “the prophecies which the Christians apply to Christ refer equally to other persons;” { 8c} that “others had lived who had applied the prophecies of Christ to themselves,” &c. &c. Thus he plainly admits prophecies to have existed of some great person, who was to come; and that Jews and Christians believed in them, but that it was uncertain whether they were accomplished.