What does Origen mean in his response when Celsus accuses Christ' of using black magic when performing miracles? What is the actual argument?

From the [Wikipedia page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contra_Celsum) : > Origen responds to Celsus's accusation that Jesus had performed his miracles using magic rather than divine powers by asserting that, unlike magicians, Jesus had not performed his miracles for show, but rather to reform his audiences. This seems like a rather bizarre explanation as intent doesn't necessarily have correlation to the method of the act. It doesn't logically follow. This leads me to think that the source that the Wikipedia is citing (Trigg 1983, p. 229 and Olson 1999, p. 103) might've butchered Origen's argument and Origen's intent. As such, my question is: What did Origen mean in this explanation? Is there more to this argument (to be more clear, Origen's argument against Celsus' accusation of Chrisst using black magic)?