Against Celsus 5.28

But perhaps they will say in reply to this that one who keeps his ancestral customs is holy and in no way unholy, since he does not also keep those of others; and again that one thought unholy by certain people is not unholy when, according to his ancestral customs, he reveres his own objects of worship and makes war on, and feasts on, those revered among people with contrary laws. But see whether this does not show great confusion about justice, holiness, and piety, as if piety were not clearly defined, nor had any nature of its own that marks out as pious those who act according to it. If, then, piety, holiness, and justice are relative, so that the same thing is holy and unholy according to different relations and laws, see whether self-control too will not consequently be relative, and courage, and prudence, and knowledge, and the other virtues; than which nothing could be more absurd. For those who take their stand more simply and in common terms against Celsus's passages, what has been said is sufficient. But since we think that some of the more inquiring will also read this work, come, let us venture to set out a few of the deeper matters, which contain a certain mystical and secret contemplation, concerning the allotment from the beginning of different regions of the earth to different overseers; and, as far as we can, let us show that the doctrine is clear of the absurdities listed.