Origen of Alexandria, Against Celsus 2.53

Everything the Jew in Celsus's dialogue says against those who believe in Jesus can equally be turned against Moses; the result is that either the charge makes no difference, or calling Jesus' miracles magic becomes the same as calling Moses' miracles magic, since both figures can be accused of the very same crimes in the very words of that Jew. Take Christ: the Jew in Celsus cries out, "But oh light and truth," and claims Jesus openly proclaims these things, just as you yourselves have written — because "there will be others who come to you with similar powers, evil and sorcerers" (cf. Matt. 24:24). Now turn to Moses: an unbeliever could say to the Jew, whether he views Moses as an Egyptian or whoever else, "But oh light and truth, Moses openly proclaims," just as you yourselves have written — because "there will be others who come to you with similar powers, evil and sorcerers." For it is written in your law: "If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or wonder, and the sign or wonder comes true, and he says, 'Let us go after other gods, which you have not known, and let us serve them,' you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams" (Deuteronomy 13:1–3) and what follows. The one who slanders Jesus' words says that even Satan devises such things and names them; the one who applies the same charge to Moses will say that even a prophet or a dreamer of dreams devises such things. Just as the Jew in Celsus says of Jesus that not even he himself is guiltless, since these things are not divine but the works of evil people, so the unbeliever will say to Moses, laying out the same points: not even Moses himself is guiltless, since these things are not divine but the works of evil people. The same tactic will be used against him: forced by the truth, Moses both revealed the deeds of others and refuted the charges against himself. And to the Jew who says this, one could ask: how then is it not wicked to count God as one thing and the sorcerers as another, based on the very same works? Someone could say to him, in light of the words of Moses that have been set forth: how then is it not wicked to count the prophet of God and his servant as one thing and the sorcerers as another, based on the very same works? Since Celsus, pressing the point, added to what I have applied in common the question: "What more than these things should we consider the others who are evil, or this one who uses them as a witness?" — we will add to what has been said: what more than these things, which Moses forbids obeying when they are shown with signs and wonders, should we consider those people evil, or Moses, from whom others have been accused concerning signs and wonders? Saying more to the same effect, to make the argument seem stronger, he says: "These things, indeed, he himself has acknowledged are not of a divine nature but the marks of certain deceivers and very evil people." Who then is he? You, Jew, say that Jesus is; but the one who accuses you, as being subject to the same crimes, will raise the very same accusation against Moses.