Joseph’s rise and the going out from Egypt
After this Celsus, for form’s sake and very obscurely, recalls the dreams of the chief cupbearer and the chief baker and of Pharaoh, and their interpretation (Genesis 40:1–41:36), as a result of which Joseph was brought out of prison and entrusted by Pharaoh with the second throne over the Egyptians (Genesis 41:14; Genesis 41:40–43). What absurdity, then, did the account of the history contain, even taken by itself, that he should set it down as part of his accusation, he who gave the title True Doctrine to a book that sets out no doctrines but accuses Christians and Jews?
He also says that the one who had been sold did things as a favour to the brothers who sold him, when they were starving and had been sent with their donkeys to trade (Genesis 42:1–3; Genesis 42:26), though Celsus does not even make clear what these things were. He sets down the recognition as well (Genesis 45:1–15), with what purpose I do not know, or what absurdity he means to point out in the recognition. For not even Momus himself, so to speak, could reasonably find fault with these things, which even apart from their figurative sense have great appeal.
He also sets down that Joseph, who had been sold as a slave, was set free and returned in procession to his father’s tomb (Genesis 50:7–13), and he thinks the account contains grounds for accusation, saying: “by whom” (that is, plainly, Joseph) “the splendid and godlike race of the Jews, spread abroad in great numbers in Egypt, was ordered to live as aliens somewhere outside and to tend flocks in despised places.” And out of his own hostile disposition he has added that they were ordered to tend flocks in despised places, without showing how Goshen, the district of Egypt, is despised (Genesis 46:34; Genesis 47:6). And he called the departure of the people from Egypt a flight, without so much as recalling what is written in Exodus about the departure of the Hebrews from the land of Egypt (Exodus 12:31–42).
We have set these things out as well, to show that Celsus placed under the heading of accusation and idle talk even things that do not appear, even according to the letter, to deserve accusation, without establishing by argument what he thinks is bad in our Scripture.
Greek
Μετὰ ταῦτα ὁ Κέλσος ὁσιας ἑνεκεν μετὰ πάσης ἀσαφείας ὑπομιμνήσκεται τῶν ὀνειράτων τοῦ ἀρχισινοχόου καὶ τοῦ ἀρχισιτοποιοῦ καὶ τοῦ Φαραὼ καὶ τῖς λύσεως αὐτῶν ἐξ ἧς προήχθη ἀπὸ τῆς φυλακῆς ἐπὶ τὸ ἐμπιστευθῆναι ὑπὸ τοῦ Φαραὼ τὸν δεύτερον κατ᾿ Αἰγυπτίων θρόνον ὁ Ἰωσήφ τί οὖν ἄτοπον εἶχεν ὁ λόγος τῆς ἱστορίας καὶ καθ᾿ ἑαυτὸν ὅτι αὐτὰ ἔθηκεν ἐν μέρει κατηγορίας ὁ ἀληθῆ λόγον ἐπγράψας τὸν οὐ δόγματα ἐκτιθέμενον ἀλλὰ Χριστιανῶν καὶ Ἰουδαιων κατηγορήσαντα; καὶ τοῖς πωλήσασί γε ἀδελφοῖς λιμώττουσι καὶ σταλεῖσι κατ᾿ ἐμπορίαν μετὰ τῶν ὄνων φησὶ χαριζόμενον τὸν πραθέντα πεποιηκέναι ἃ οὐδὲ παρέστησεν ὁ Κέλσος, καὶ τὸν ἀναγνωρισμὸν δὲ τίθησιν, οὐκ οἶδα τί βουλόμενος καὶ τί ἐμφαίνων ἄτοπον ἐκ τοῦ ἀναγνωρισμοῦ· οὐδὲ γὰρ, ὡς ἔστιν εἰπεῖν, καὶ αὐτῷ τῷ Μώμῳ δυνατὸν ἦν τούτων εὐλόγως κατηγορεῖν, καὶ χωρὶς τῆς τροπολογίας ἐχόντων πολὺ τὸ ἀγωγόν, τίθησι δὲ καὶ τὸν εἰς δοῦλον πραθέντα Ἰωσὴφ ἐλευθερούμενον καὶ μετὰ πομπῆς ἐπανιόντα πρὸς τὸν τοῦ πατρὸς τάφον καὶ νομίζει κατηγορίαν περιέχειν τὸν λόγον εἰπὼν τό· ὑφ᾿ οὗ (δῆλον δ᾿ ὅτι τοῦ Ἰωσὴφ) τὸ λαμπρὸν καὶ θεσπέσιον Ἰουδαίων γένος, ἐπὶ πλῆθος ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ σπαρὲν, ἔξω που παροικεῖν καὶ ποιμαίνειν ἐν τοῖς ἀτίμοις ἐκελεύσθη, καὶ προσέθηκεν ἀπὸ τῆς μισητικῆς ἑαυτοῦ προαιρέσεως τὸ ἐν ἀτίμοις αὐτοὺς κεκελεῦσθαι ποιμαίνειν, οὐ παραστήσας, πῶς Γεσὲμ ὁ Αἰγυπτίων νομὸς ἄτιμός ἐστι, τὴν δ᾿ ἀπ᾿ Αἰγύπτου ἔξοδον τοῦ λαοῦ φυγὴν ὠνόμασεν, οὐδὲ τὴν ἀρχὴν ὑπομνησθεὶς τῶν ἐν τῇ Ἐξόδῳ γεγραμμένων περὶ τῆς ἐξόδου τῶν Ἑβραίων ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου, ἐξεθέμεθα δὲ καὶ ταῦτα, παραδεικνύντες ὅτι καὶ τὰ μηδὲ κατὰ τὸ ῥητὸν τοῦ κατηγορεῖσθαι φανέντα ἄξια ἔθηκεν ἐν μοίρᾳ κατηγορίας καὶ φλυαρίας ὁ Κέλσος, μὴ παραστήσας λόγῳ ὃ οἴεται μοχθηρὸν τῆς γραφῆς ἡμῶν.