Against Celsus 5.26

"And one must keep the laws," he says, "not only because it has occurred to different peoples to think differently and one must keep what has been established for the community, but also because, as is likely, the parts of the earth were from the beginning allotted to different overseers and divided into certain dominions, and are administered in this way." Then, as though forgetting what he said against the Jews, Celsus now includes them in his general praise of all who keep their ancestral customs, saying: "And indeed, the things done among each people would be rightly done in the way that pleases those overseers." And see whether he does not, as far as in him lies, plainly wish the Jew living by his own laws not to depart from them, as though he would act unholily if he did; for he says that "it is not holy to abolish what has been customary in each place from the beginning." I would like to ask him, or those who agree with him, in reply to this, who it was that from the beginning allotted the parts of the earth to different overseers, and clearly the land of the Jews and the Jews themselves to the one or ones to whom it fell. Did Zeus, as Celsus might call him, allot the Jewish nation and their land to someone or some beings, and did he wish the one to whom Judaea fell to make such laws among the Jews? Or did this happen against his will? Whichever way he answers, you see that the argument will be hemmed in. And if the parts of the earth were not allotted to their overseers by some one being, then each took a share of the earth by lot, as it happened, without anyone presiding; but this too is absurd, and in some measure does away with the providence of the God over all.