Origen,
Against Celsus 6.28:
With some such object as this in view does Celsus seem to have been actuated, when he alleged that Christians term the Creator an accursed divinity; in order that he who believes these charges of his against us, should, if possible, arise and exterminate the Christians as the most impious of mankind. Confusing, moreover, things that are distinct, he states also the reason why the God of the Mosaic cosmogony is termed accursed, asserting that such is his character, and worthy of execration in the opinion of those who so regard him, inasmuch as he pronounced a curse upon the serpent, who introduced the first human beings to the knowledge of good and evil. Now he ought to have known that those who have espoused the cause of the serpent, because he gave good advice to the first human beings, and who go far beyond the Titans and Giants of fable, and are on this account called Ophites [Ὀφιανοὶ], are so far from being Christians, that they bring accusations against Jesus to as great a degree as Celsus himself; and they do not admit any one into their assembly until he has uttered maledictions against Jesus [οὐκ ἔλαττον Κέλσου κατηγορεῖν αὐτοὺς τοῦ Ἰησοῦ καὶ μὴ πρότερον προσίεσθαί τινα ἐπὶ τὸ συνέδριον ἑαυτῶν, ἐὰν μὴ ἀρὰς θῆται κατὰ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ]. See, then, how irrational is the procedure of Celsus, who, in his discourse against the Christians, represents as such those who will not even listen to the name of Jesus, or omit even that He was a wise man, or a person of virtuous character! What, then, could evince greater folly or madness, not only on the part of those who wish to derive their name from the serpent as the author of good, but also on the part of Celsus, who thinks that the accusations with which the Ophites are charged, are chargeable also against the Christians! Long ago, indeed, that Greek philosopher who preferred a state of poverty, and who exhibited the pattern of a happy life, showing that he was not excluded from happiness although he was possessed of nothing, termed himself a Cynic; while these impious wretches, as not being human beings, whose enemy the serpent is, but as being serpents, pride themselves upon being called Ophites from the serpent, which is an animal most hostile to and greatly dreaded by man, and boast of one Euphrates as the introducer of these unhallowed opinions.
Origen, catena fragment 47 on 1 Corinthians (my own quick translation):
Ἔστι τις αἵρεσις ἥτις οὐ προσίεται τὸν προσιόντα εἰ μὴ ἀναθεματίσῃ τὸν Ἰησοῦν. καὶ ἡ αἵρεσις ἐκείνη ἀξία ἐστὶ τοῦ ὀνόματος οὗ ἠγάπησεν· ἔστι γὰρ ἡ αἵρεσις τῶν καλουμένων Ὀφιανῶν, οἵτινες οὐ θεμιτὰ λέγουσιν εἰς ἐγκώμιον τοῦ ὄφεως, ὃς ἐπικατάρατός ἐστιν ἀπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ. / There is a certain heresy which does not welcome one coming in unless he should pronounce anathema upon Jesus. And that heresy is worthy of the name which it loved; for it is the heresy of those called Ophites, who say things which are not permitted as an encomium for the serpent, who was cursed by God.
ETA: And
Against Heresies 1.30 appears to be about the Ophites. Sections 12-13 describe a separationist Christology whereby Christ descended into Jesus at his baptism and left him right before his death. This seems at least compatible with the idea of cursing Jesus in order to glorify Christ, who is now free of him.
