No, Celsus was not said to indicate a deity was generated ("born") from the Thracians. The text just says the Thracians were adept of their own mysteries about gods (or a god):Again, the provenance of a deity from a historical country was rather common in the ancient world. For example, Celsus talks en passant about a deity from the Tracians.
Origen. Contra Celsus, Book VI, Chapter XXII "For the mysteries of Mithras do not appear to be more famous among the Greeks than those of Eleusis, or than those in AEgina, where individuals are initiated in the rites of Hecate. But if he must introduce barbarian mysteries with their explanation, why not rather those of the Egyptians, which are highly regarded by many, or those of the Cappadocians regarding the Comanian Diana, or those of the Thracians, or even those of the Romans themselves, who initiate the noblest members of their senate?" BTW, this is the only occurrence of "Thracians" in all the books of Origen about Celsus.
Ro 9 3b-5a YLT "... for my brethren, my kindred, according to the flesh, who are Israelites, whose is the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the lawgiving, and the service, and the promises,
whose are the fathers, and of whom is the Christ, according to the flesh, ..."
(words in italics not in the Greek text)
Paul is an Israelite, according to the flesh, the same goes for Christ, according to the flesh.
And Christ is not said from a country, but of people of a whole nation. There is a difference. And the Greek text does not say "comes".
Of course. Sure, "salvation" is not a historical person. So what?When John says that ''the salvation comes from the Jews'' in the Samaritane woman episode, he doesn't mean a historical person.
Cordially, Bernard