[snip]
(19) And after eternal life, perhaps it will also leap into the Father who is beyond eternal life. For Christ is life but he who is greater than Christ is greater than life.
[snip]
I like how unis hold up Origen as a poster boy for ECF universalism but when something Origen says contradicts universalism, as does Comm John 13:60, they have all kinds of arguments why Origen is wrong. This is trying to eat your cake and have it too.
What contradiction? There's no contradiction to universalism there.
Origen makes it clear that "eternal fire" (Mt.25:46) is remedial, corrective & temporary:
"Chapter 10. On the Resurrection, and the Judgment, the Fire of Hell, and Punishments."
"1. But since the discourse has reminded us of the subjects of a future judgment and of retribution, and of the punishments of sinners, according to the threatenings of holy Scripture and the contents of the Church's teaching— viz., that when the time of judgment comes, everlasting fire, and outer darkness, and a prison, and a furnace, and other punishments of like nature, have been prepared for sinners— let us see what our opinions on these points ought to be."
"...nevertheless in such a way, that even the body which rises again of those who are to be destined to everlasting fire or to severe punishments, is by the very change of the resurrection so incorruptible, that it cannot be corrupted and dissolved even by severe punishments. If, then, such be the qualities of that body which will arise from the dead, let us now see what is the meaning of the threatening of eternal fire."
"...And when this dissolution and rending asunder of soul shall have been tested by the application of fire, a solidification undoubtedly into a firmer structure will take place, and a restoration be effected."
[De Principis Book 2]
CHURCH FATHERS: De Principiis, Book II (Origen)
There is no contradiction! In 13:19 there was one speculative comment "after [eternal life,] perhaps it will also leap into the Father." In 13:60 Origen makes five definitive, NOT speculative, statements about eternal life. "eternal life," "[1] never perishes,""[2]remains.""[3]is not taken away,""[4] is not consumed,"[5] does [not] perish."
If you say [a] "it looks like it will rain today, maybe it will rain" & then say "it won't rain today", then [c] you are contradicting yourself. Both statements cannot be true.
As to aionios life, if it refers to life during the aions and, as Origen says, the aions end, then when all will leap into the Father, who is "beyond eternal life", then it "remains" & is "not taken away" during the aions. It isn't "consumed" but, as Origen said "leaps" into the Father who is "beyond eternal life". Notice BTW that it doesn't say "maybe" the Father is "beyond eternal life", but that He - is - "beyond eternal life".
"And after eternal life, perhaps it will also leap into the Father who is beyond eternal life".
The word "perhaps" is related to the "it will also leap", whatever "it" refers to. Not to the statement before which definitively speaks of there being an "after eternal life", nor to the phrase after it, "beyond eternal life".
What is the Greek word for "never" in "never persishes"? In some bible translations it involves a deceptive rendering of the word aion which means literally eon, not "never". So your opinion about what Origen said in section 60 can be easily explained away. And be in harmony with what he said earlier in statements about after/beyond "eternal life".
.....It appears to me that "pope" Ramelli is pushing her agenda and ignoring everything in Origen which contradicts her.
What gives you that idea & why speak of her as pope? She has read Origen in the original Greek & Latin. You haven't. She is a partistic scholar, especially of Origen. You are not.
Where can I review the complete text of Origen Comm John to verify that the alleged quotes are correct?
As you've been previously informed, this is where i got the Greek text of Origen that i posted:
TLG - Home
Go to the same source from which you quoted all the Greek in the other thread. The Greek for comm John 13:60 will be right there.
I may do that. Although when i checked last year most texts of Origen were unavailable in the ancient koine Greek language.
Not relevant! I don't see any Greek here. What exactly do you think this proves?
It opposes your opinions based on English translations alone, such as in section 60 above & your claims re Origen's "definition" of aion & aionios as "eternal". And it opposes your claims that the definition of aion/ios & olam in the Scriptures is "eternal" & always means "eternal" except when used in hyperbole.
Clearly your arguments don't have even half a leg to stand on.
Unique Proof For Christian, Biblical Universalism
Universalism – The Truth Shall Make You Free
Eternity in the Bible by Gerry Beauchemin – Hope Beyond Hell
-----------------------
Then De Principiis contradicts commentary on John.
How is that?
Since you do not know what "it" refers to how can you cite this paragraph as evidence of anything? Try reading the paragraph in-context at your link maybe you will understand it then. I suggest you read para.18
Whatever "it" refers to doesn't change the fact of Origen speaking of "after eternal life" and "beyond eternal life", which was supported also by:
Evagrius's Kephalaia Gnostika
Evagrius's Kephalaia Gnostika: A New Translation of the Unreformed Text from ...
By Ilaria L.E. Ramelli (pages 10- 11)
Where again Origen refers to what is after eternal life, as well as after "the ages", beyond "ages of the ages" [often mistranslated forever & ever] and all ages.
Further re Origen & aionios:
"That threats of aionios punishment are helpful for those immature who abstain from evil out of fear and not for love is repeated, e.g. in CC 6,26: "it is not helpful to go up to what will come beyond that punishment, for the sake of those who restrain themselves only with much difficulty, out of fear of the aionios punishment"; Hom. in Jer. 20 (19), 4: for a married woman it is better to believe that a faithless woman will undergo aionios punishment and keep faithful, rather than knowing the truth and becoming disloyal;" (p.178-9).
Ilaria Ramelli, The Christian Doctrine of Apokatastasis: A Critical Assessment from the New Testament to Eriugena (Brill, 2013. 890 pp.)
CHURCH FATHERS: Contra Celsus, Book VI (Origen)
CHURCH FATHERS: Contra Celsus, Book VI (Origen)
Furthermore re Origen & aionios, Origen makes it clear that "eternal fire" (Mt.25:46) is remedial, corrective & temporary:
"Chapter 10. On the Resurrection, and the Judgment, the Fire of Hell, and Punishments."
"1. But since the discourse has reminded us of the subjects of a future judgment and of retribution, and of the punishments of sinners, according to the threatenings of holy Scripture and the contents of the Church's teaching— viz., that when the time of judgment comes, everlasting fire, and outer darkness, and a prison, and a furnace, and other punishments of like nature, have been prepared for sinners— let us see what our opinions on these points ought to be."
"...nevertheless in such a way, that even the body which rises again of those who are to be destined to everlasting fire or to severe punishments, is by the very change of the resurrection so incorruptible, that it cannot be corrupted and dissolved even by severe punishments. If, then, such be the qualities of that body which will arise from the dead, let us now see what is the meaning of the threatening of eternal fire."
"...And when this dissolution and rending asunder of soul shall have been tested by the application of fire, a solidification undoubtedly into a firmer structure will take place, and a restoration be effected."
[De Principis Book 2]
CHURCH FATHERS: De Principiis, Book II (Origen)
Links to the Works of Origen in English, Greek, and Latin
Links to the Works of Origen in English, Greek, and Latin
And yet more re Origen & aion/ios:
"Origen, the greatest exegete of the early Church, was well aware of the polysemy of aión and its adjectival forms. In Hom. in Ex. 6.13 he writes: “Whenever Scripture says, ‘from aeon to aeon,’ the reference is to an interval of time, and it is clear that it will have an end. And if Scripture says, ‘in another aeon,’ what is indicated is clearly a longer time, and yet an end is still fixed. And when the ‘aeons of the aeons’ are mentioned, a certain limit is again posited, perhaps unknown to us, but surely established by God” (quoted in Ramelli, The Christian Doctrine of Apokatastasis, p. 161). And Comm. in Rom. 6.5: “In Scriptures, aión is sometimes found in the sense of something that knows no end; at times it designates something that has no end in the present world, but will have in the future one; sometimes it means a certain stretch of time; or again the duration of the life of a single person is called aión” (quoted in Ramelli, p. 163).
Sometimes Eternity Ain’t Forever: Aiónios and the Universalist Hope
Origen did NOT say there was a beyond eternal life.
He did. You saw the English translation saying so. And the Greek as well. Sorry to disappoint you, but the vast majority of people are not going to be kept alive only to be tortured forever by Love Omnipotent.
I couldn't find it at TLG.
Did you pay for the service?
If most texts of Origen were unavailable how were you able to copy from Origen's commentary on John?
John's commentary of the portion i quoted was available. AFAIK the site has many Greek works, but no Latin. Much of what Origen wrote is in Latin.
