In a review to a manuscript I wrote one of the reviewers claimed in strong words that two important references were omitted. In fact, both references were cited in the text. I suspect the reviewer is among the authors of these references, since I recommended one of them as a reviewer during submission. The manuscript was rejected and I do not plan to resubmit, still I am contemplating if I should respond to this presumptive mistake by the reviewer. The reason is that the perceived omission likely affects the reviewers opinion of me as an author in a negative way. I think that there is a non-negligible chance that the same reviewer may also review future work. Should I accept this and move on or should I ask the editor to forward to the reviewer a statement that the references were not omitted?
The editor rejected your paper, not the reviewer. You can quickly write to the editor that the reviewer may have overlooked your work, as seen in the not capturing/fully reading the citations you gave.
However, it is unlikely that the absence of them was so relevant to the decision.
"the perceived omission likely affects the reviewers opinion of me as an author in a negative way": it is not the opinion about you, it is about your work. If you take things so personally you are bound to a lot of insatisfaction in your life (academic and not). This apply to how you perceive yourself, as well as you perceive the others: stop assuming or guessing a reviewer identity and the "hidden" motives behind the request to cite certain works.