• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

the fallacy of eternal torment and related issues

Status
Not open for further replies.

Pilgrim 33

Well-Known Member
Apr 28, 2004
841
13
77
Texas
✟1,068.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Dr. Bigg on Origen.

"There will come a time when man, completely subjected to Christ by the operation of the Holy Ghost," says Bigg, epitomizing Origen, "shall in Christ be completely subjected to the Father. But now," he adds, "the end is always like the beginning. The manifold diversity of the world is to close in unity, it must then have sprung from unity. His expansion of this theory is in fact an elaborate commentary upon the eighth chapter of the Epistle to the Romans and the fifteenth chapter of the First Epistle to the Corinthians. Those, he felt, were the two keys, the one to the eternity before, and other to the eternity after. What the church cannot pardon, God may. The sin which has no forgiveness in this æon or the æon to come, may be atoned for in some one of the countless æons of the vast hereafter." This exegesis serves to show us how primitive church treated the "unpardonable sins." (Matt. xii: 32.) The sin against the Holy Ghost "shall not be forgiven in this world (aion, age) nor in the world (aion, age) to come." According to Origen, it may be in "some one of the countless æons of the vast hereafter."

The historian Schaff concedes that among those quickened and inspired to follow Origen were Pamphilus, Eusebius of Cæsarea, Didymus of Alexandria, Athanasius, Basil the Great, Gregory of Nazianzum, and Gregory of Nyssa; and among the Latin fathers, Hilary and Jerome. And he feels obliged to add: "Gregory of Nyssa and perhaps also Didymus, even adhered to Origen's doctrine of the final salvation of all created intelligences."2
 
Upvote 0

Pilgrim 33

Well-Known Member
Apr 28, 2004
841
13
77
Texas
✟1,068.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Bunsen on Origen.

Bunsen declares that Origen adduces in "De Principiis," in favor of "the universality of final salvation," the arguments of "nearly all the "Ante-Nicene fathers before him." And Bunsen proceeds to show that the conviction that so broad a faith would not enable hierarchs to control the people, inclined his opponents to resort to the terrors of an indefinite, and thus, to their apprehension, infinite and eternal punishment, which has vengeance and not amendment for its end. "Away with Origen! What is to become of virtue, and heaven, and--clerical power, if the fear of eternal punishment is not forever kept before men's eyes as the prop of human and divine authority?" So thought Demetrius, Bishop of Alexandria in 230. Bunsen adds that Origen taught that "the soul, having a substance and life of her own, will receive her reward, according to her merits, either obtaining the inheritance of eternal life and blessedness, or being delivered over to eternal death and torments," after which comes the resurrection, the anastasis, the rising into incorruption and glory, when "finally at the end of time, God will be all in all; not by the destruction of the creature, but by its gradual elevation into his divine being. This is life eternal, according to Christ's own teaching." Of the grand faith in universal redemption, Prof. Plumptre says: "It has been, and is, the creed of the great poets whom we accept as the spokesmen of a nation's thoughts." 3
 
Upvote 0

Pilgrim 33

Well-Known Member
Apr 28, 2004
841
13
77
Texas
✟1,068.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Origen Cruelly Treated.

The treatment experienced by Origen is one of the anomalies of history. The first hostility to him, followed by his deposition and excommunication, A.D. 232, is conceded to have been in consequence of his opposition to the Episcopal tendencies of Bishop Demetrius, and the envy of the bishop. His Universalism was not in question. Lardner says that he was "not expelled from Alexandria for heresy, but for envy." Bunsen says: "Demetrius induced a numerous synod of Egyptian bishops to condemn as heretical * * * Origen's opinion respecting the universality of final salvation." But Bunsen seems to contradict his own words by adding: "This opinion he had certainly stated so as even to hold out a prospect of the conversion of Satan himself by the irresistible power of the love of the Almighty," bet he was condemned "'not,' as says St. Jerome, who was no friend to his theology, 'on account of novelty of doctrine--not for heresy--but because they could not bear the glory of his learning and eloquence.'" The opposition to Origen seems to have begun in the petty anger of Demetrius, who was incensed because of Origen, a layman, delivered discourses in the presence of bishops (Alexander and Theoctistus), though at their request, and because he was ordained our of his diocese. Demetrius continued his persecutions until he had degraded Origen from the office of presbyter, though all the ecclesiastical authorities in Palestine refused to recognize the validity of the sentence. His excommunication, however, was disregarded by the bishops of Palestine, Arabia and Greece. Going from Alexandria to Greece and Palestine, Origen was befriended by Bishop Firmilian in Cappadocia for two years; and was also welcomed in Nicomedia and Athens.4

Huet says: "Everyone, with hardly an exception, adhered to Origen." And Doucin: "Provided one had Origen on his side, he believed himself certain to have the truth."
 
Upvote 0

Pilgrim 33

Well-Known Member
Apr 28, 2004
841
13
77
Texas
✟1,068.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Origen's Theology Generally Accepted.

That his opinions were not obnoxious is proved by the fact that most of his friends and followers were placed in charge of the most important churches. Says De Pressense: "The Eastern church of the Third Century canceled, in fact, the sentence passed upon Origen under the influence of the hierarchical party. At Alexandria itself his disciples maintained the pre-eminence, and at the death of Demetrius, Heraclas, who had been the most intimate friend and trusted disciple of Origen, was raised to the Episcopal dignity by the free choice of the elders. * * * Heraclas died A.D. 249 and was succeeded by another disciple of Origen, * * * Dionysius of Alexandria. * * * He was an assiduous disciple of Origen, and with his death the halcyon days of the school of Alexandria were now over. Dionysius was the last of its great masters." It is to be deplored that none of the writings of Dionysius are known to exist.

Theophylact, Bishop of Cæsarea, expressed the most ardent friendship for Origen, and offered him a refuge in Cæsarea, and a position as teacher. Firmilian, Bishop of Cæsarea in Cappadocia, received Origen during Maximin's persecution, and was always a fast friend. The majority of the Palestinian bishops were friendly. Jerome mentions Trypho as a disciple of Origen. He was author of several commentaries on the Old Testament. Hippolytus is spoken of as "a disciple of Origen and Dionysius of Alexandria, 'the Origen of the West'" * * * attracted to Origen "by all the affinities of heart and mind."
 
Upvote 0

Pilgrim 33

Well-Known Member
Apr 28, 2004
841
13
77
Texas
✟1,068.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
His Universalism Never Condemned.

The state of opinion on the subject of universal salvation is shown by the fact that through Ignatius, Irenænus, Hippolytus and others wrote against the prevalent heresies of their times, Universalism is never named among them. Some of the alleged errors of Origen were condemned, but his doctrine of universal salvation, never. Methodius, who wrote A.D. 300; Pamphilus and Eusebius, A.D. 310; Eustathius, A.D. 380; Epiphanius, A.D. 376 and 394; Theophilus, A.D. 400-404, and Jerome, A.D. 400; all give lists of Origen's errors, but none name his Universalism among them. Besides, some of those who condemned his errors were Universalists, as the school of Antioch. And many who were opponents of Origenism were mentioned by Origen's enemies with honor notwithstanding they were Universalists, as Clement of Alexandria, and Gregory of Nyssa.

Pamphilus and Eusebius, A.D. 307-310, jointly wrote an Apology for Origen that contained declarations from the ancient fathers endorsing his views of the Restitution. This work, had it survived, would undoubtedly be an invaluable repository of evidence to show the general prevalence of his views on the part of those whose writings have not been preserved. All Christians must lament with Lardner the loss of a work that would have told us so much of the great Alexandrian. It seems to have been the fashion with the ancient Latin theologians to burn the books they could not refute.

Farrar names the eminent ancients who mention Origen with greatest honor and respect. Some, like Augustine, do not accept his views, but all utter eulogistic words, many adopt his sentiments, and Eusebius added a sixth book to the production of Pamphilus, in consequence of the detractions against Origen. While he had his opponents and defamers, the best and the most of his contemporaries and immediate successors either accepted his doctrines or eulogized his goodness and greatness.

Origen bitterly lamented the misrepresentation of his views even during his lifetime. How much more might he have said could he have foreseen what would be said of him after his death.

Pamphilus, who was martyred A.D. 294, and Eusebius, in their lost Apology for Origen, which is mentioned by at least two writers who had seen it, gave many testimonies of fathers preceding Origen, favoring Universalism,5 and Domitian, Bishop of Ancyra, complains that those who condemn the restorationism of Origen "anathematize all those saints who preceded and followed him," implying the general prevalence of Universalism before and after the days of Origen.
 
Upvote 0

Pilgrim 33

Well-Known Member
Apr 28, 2004
841
13
77
Texas
✟1,068.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Origen's Contemporaries.

Among the celebrated contemporaries and immediate successors of Origen whose writings on the question of man's final destiny do not survive, but who, from the relations they sustained to this greatest of the Fathers, must have sympathized with his belief in universal restoration, may be mentioned Alexander, Bishop of Jerusalem (A.D. 216), a fellow student; Theoctistus, Bishop of Cæsarea (A.D. 240-260); Heraclas, Bishop of Alexandria (A.D. 200-248); Ambrose (A.D. 200-230); Firmilian, Bishop of Cæsarea (A.D. 200-270); Athenodore, his brother (A.D. 210-270); all friends and adherents of Origen. They must have cherished what was at the time the prevalent sentiment among Oriental Christians--a belief in universal restoration--though we have no testimonies from them.

On the unsupported statement of Jerome, Origen is declared to have protested his orthodoxy to the reigning Pope, Fabian, A.D. 246, and solicited re-admission to the communion of the church. He is said to have laid the blame of the publication of some of his heterodox sentiments to the haste of his friend Ambrose. But as Origen continued to teach Universalism all the rest of his life the statement of Jerome must be rejected, or universal restoration was not among the heterodox doctrines. At the time Origen is said to have written the letter, his pupil and friend, Dionysius, was Patriarch of Alexandria, and he wrote to Pope Fabian and other bishops, it is probable, to effect a reconciliation, to which Dionysius and most of the bishops would be favorable. Besides, Origen is on record as classing all bishops as of equal eminence, except as goodness gave them superior rank, so that he could not have regarded Fabian as pope. That the general sentiment during Origen's times and for some time after was universalistic is thus made apparent. 6
 
Upvote 0

Pilgrim 33

Well-Known Member
Apr 28, 2004
841
13
77
Texas
✟1,068.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Ancient Universalist Schools.

Dr. Beecher's Testimony.

Dr. Beecher says: "Two great facts stand out on the page of ecclesiastical history. One, that the first system of Christian theology was composed and issued by Origen in the year 230 after Christ, of which a fundamental and essential element was the doctrine of the universal restoration of all fallen beings to their original holiness and union with God. The second is, that after the lapse of a little more than three centuries, in the year 544, this doctrine was for the first time condemned and anathematized as heretical. * * * From and after this point (A.D. 553) the doctrine of eternal punishment reigned with undisputed sway during the Middle Ages that preceded the Reformation. * * * What, then, was the state of facts as to the leading theological schools of the Christian world, in the age of Origen, and some centuries after? It was in brief this: There were at least six theological schools in the church at large. Of these six schools, one, and only one, was decidedly and earnestly in favor of the doctrine of future eternal punishment. One was in favor of the annihilation of the wicked, two were in favor of the doctrine of universal restoration on the principles of Origen, and two in favor of universal restoration on the principles of Theodore of Mopsuestia. It is also true that the prominent defenders of the doctrine of universal restoration were decided believers in the divinity of Christ, in the Trinity, in the incarnation and atonement, and in the great Christian doctrine of regeneration; and were in piety, devotion, Christian activity, and missionary enterprise, as well as in learning and intellectual power and attainments, inferior to none in the best ages of the church, and were greatly superior to those by whom, in after ages, they were condemned and anathematized. From two theological schools there went forth an opposition to the doctrine of eternal punishment, which had its ground in a deeper Christian interest; inasmuch as the doctrine of a universal restoration was closely connected with the entire dogmatic systems of both of these schools, namely that of Origen (Alexandrian), and the school of Antioch." "Three at least of the greatest of the ancient schools of Christian theology--the schools of Alexandria, Antioch and Cæsarea--leaned on this subject to the views of Origen, not in their details, but in their general hopefulness. * * * The fact that even these Origenistic fathers were able, with perfect honesty, to use the current phraseology, shows that such phraseology was at least capable of a different interpretation from that (now) commonly put upon it." The school in Northern Africa favored the doctrine of endless punishment; that in Asia Minor annihilation. The two in Alexandria and Cæsarea were Universalistic of the school of Origen; those at Antioch and Edessa were Universalistic of the school of Theodore of Mopsuestia and Diodore of Tarsus. "Decidedly the most powerful minds (300 to 400 A.D.) adopted the doctrine of universal restoration, and those who did not adopt it entered into no controversy about it with those who did. In the African school all this was reversed. From the very beginning they took strong ground in favor of the doctrine of eternal punishment, as an essential part of a great system of law of which God was the center." 7

It should be noted, however, that the schools in Asia Minor and Northern Africa, where annihilation and endless punishment were taught, were not strictly divinity schools, but mere seminaries.

The one school out of the six in Christendom that taught endless punishment was in Africa, and the doctrine was derived by Latins from misunderstanding a foreign language, through mis-translations of the original Greek Scriptures, and was obtained by infusing the virus of Roman secularism into the simplicity of Christianity. Maine in his "Ancient Law" attributes the difference between Eastern and Western theology to this cause. The student of primitive Christianity will see than Tertullian, Cyprian, Minucius Felix, down to Augustine, were influenced by these causes, and created the theological travesty that ruled the Christian world for dark and sorrowful centuries.

On this point (that Origen's views were general) Neale observes: "In reading the works of Origen, we are not to consider his tenets and opinions as those of one isolated doctor;--they are rather an embodiment of the doctrines handed down in the Catechetical school of Alexandria. And this school was the type, or model, according to which the mind of the Alexandrine church was cast; the philosophy of Pantænus descended to Clemens,--and from him it was caught by Origen." 8
 
Upvote 0

Pilgrim 33

Well-Known Member
Apr 28, 2004
841
13
77
Texas
✟1,068.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Origen Misrepresented.

From these facts it is easily seen that the heresies of which Origen was accused did not touch the doctrine of universal restoration. They were for teaching inequality between the persons of the Trinity, the pre-existence of the human soul, denying the resurrection of the body, affirming that wicked angels will not suffer endless punishment, and that all souls will be absorbed into the Infinite Fountain whence they sprang, like drops falling into the sea. This latter accusation was a perversion of his teaching that God will be "all in all." Some of these doctrines are only found in alleged quotations in the works of his opponents, as Jerome and others who wrote against him. His language was sometimes misunderstood, and oftener ignorantly or purposely perverted. Many quotations are from works of his not in existence. Interpolations and alterations were made by his enemies in his works even during his lifetime, as he complained. Epiphanius "attacked Origen in Jerusalem after he was dead, and tried to make Bishop John denounce him. Failing here he tried to compel Jerome, through fear for his reputation for orthodoxy, to do the same, and succeeded so far as to disgrace Jerome forever for his meanness, and cowardice, and double dealing. The Theophilus, Bishop of Alexandria, came to his aid in anathematizing Origen. He called a synod A.D. 399, in which he condemned Origen and anathematized all who should read his works." "After this, Epiphanius died. But his followers pursued the same work in his spirit, until Origen was condemned again by Justinian;" this time for his Universalism, but, as will be seen hereafter, the church did not sustain Justinian's attack.9
 
Upvote 0

Pilgrim 33

Well-Known Member
Apr 28, 2004
841
13
77
Texas
✟1,068.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Dr. Pond's Misrepresentation of Origen.

The reprehensible practices to which the odium theologicum has impelled good men, is illustrated by Dr. Enoch Pond, professor in Bangor Theological Seminary. Displeased with the wonderfully candid statements of Dr. Edward Beecher, in his articles in "The Christian Union," afterwards contained in "History of the Doctrine of Future Retribution," he reviewed the articles in the same paper, and in order to convict Dr. Beecher of inaccuracy, Dr. Pond quotes from Crombie's translation of Rufinus's Latin version instead of from Crombie's rendering of the actual Greek of Origen, and this, too, when not only does Rufinus confess that he has altered the sense but in the very book (III) from which Dr. Pond quotes is Crombie's translation of the Greek, and the following note from Crombie is at the beginning of the chapter: "The whole of this chapter has been preserved in the original Greek, which is literally translated in corresponding portions on each page, so that the differences between Origen's own words and the amplifications and alterations of the paraphrase of Rufinus may be at once patent to the reader." It almost seems that there is a fatality attendant upon all hostile critics who deal with Origen. The injustice he received in life seems to have dogged his name in every age.

The manner in which theological questions were settled and creeds established in those days, is shown by Athanasius. He says that when the Emperor Constantius at the council of Milan, A.D. 355, commanded the bishops to subscribe against Athanasius and they replied that there was no ecclesiastical canon to that effect, the Emperor said, "Whatever I will, let that be esteemed a canon."
 
Upvote 0

Pilgrim 33

Well-Known Member
Apr 28, 2004
841
13
77
Texas
✟1,068.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Universalism in Good Repute in the Fifth Century.

A.D. 402, when Epiphanius came for Cyprus to Constantinople with a synodical decree condemning Origen's books without excommunicating Origen, he declined Chrysostom's invitation to lodge at the Episcopal palace, as Chrysostom was a friend and advocate of Origen. He urged that clergy of the city to sign the decree, but, Socrates says, "many refused, among them Theotinus, Bishop of Scythia, who said, 'I choose not, Epiphanius, to insult the memory of one who ended his life piously long ago; not dare I be guilty of so impious an act, as that of condemning what our predecessors by no means rejected; and specially when I know of no evil doctrine contained in Origen's books. * * * Those who attempt to fix a stigma on these writings are unconsciously casting a dishonor upon the sacred volume whence their principles are drawn.' Such was the reply which Theotinus, a prelate, eminent for his piety and rectitude of life, made to Epiphanius." In the next chapter (xiii), Socrates states that only worthless characters decried Origen. Among them he mentions Methodius, Eustathius, Apollinaris and Theophilus, as "four revilers," whose "censure was his commendation." Socrates was born about A.D. 380, and his book continues Eusebius's history to A.D. 445, and he records what he received from those who knew the facts. This makes it clear that while Origen's views were rejected by some, they were in good repute by the most and the best, two hundred years after his death.

Even Augustine admits that "some, nay, very many" (nonnulli, quam plurimi), pity with human feeling, the everlasting punishment of the damned, and do not believe that it is so." 10 The kind of people thus believing are described by Doederlein, "The more highly distinguished in Christian antiquity any one was for learning, so much the more did he cherish and defend the hope of future torments sometime ending."
 
Upvote 0

Pilgrim 33

Well-Known Member
Apr 28, 2004
841
13
77
Texas
✟1,068.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Different Opinions on Human Destiny.

Previous to A.D. 200 three different opinions were held among Christians--endless punishment, annihilation, and universal salvation; but, so far as the literature of the times shows, the subject was never one of controversy, and the last-named doctrine prevailed most, if the assertions of it in literature are any test of its acceptance by the people. For a hundred and fifty years, A.D. 250 to 400, though Origen and his heresies on many points are frequently attacked and condemned, there is scarcely a whisper on record against his Universalism. On the other hand, to be called an Origenist was a high honor, from 260 to 290. A.D. 300 on, the doctrine of endless punishment began to be more explicitly stated, notably by Arnobius and Lactantius. And thenceforward to 370, while some of the fathers taught endless punishment, and others annihilation, the doctrine of most is not stated. One fact, however, is conspicuous: though all kinds of heresy were attacked, Universalism was not considered sufficiently heretical to entitle it to censure.11


1 Copious references have already been made on this point.

2 "The theology of Christendom and its character for the first three centuries was shaped by three men. Ignatius, Irenæus and Cyprian gave its organization; Clement and Origen its form of religious thought." British Quarterly Review, 1879.

3 Spirits in Prison, p. 13. Dr. Ballou in his Ancient History of Universalism, p. 95, note, gives at length references to the passages in Delarue's edition of Origen in which the doctrine of universal salvation is expressed in Origen's own words.

4 De Pressense charges the acrimony of Demetrius to Origen's opposition to the encroachments of the Episcopate and to his disapproval of the ambition of the hierarchy. Martyrs and Apologists, p. 332.

5 Routh, Reliquiæ Sacræ, iii, p. 498.

6 "At the close of the Second Century the church in Alexandria was wealthy and numerous. Demetrius, the bishop, gave the finishing stroke to the congregationalism of the church by censuring Origen and by appointing suffragan bishops whom he persuaded to pass a sentence upon Origen which the presbyters had refused to sanction." Redepenning, as quoted by Bigg.

7 Hist. Doct. Fut. Ret.

8 Holv Eastern Church. p. 37.

9 Socrates, the ecclesiastical historian, defends Origen from the attacks of his enemies, and finding him sound on the co-eternity of Christ with God, will not hear of any heresy in him. Eccl. Hist., b. vi, ch. xiii.

10 Enchirid. ch. 112.

11 According to Reuss "The doctrine of a general restoration of all rational creatures has been recommended by very many of the greatest thinkers of the ancient church and of modern times.
 
Upvote 0

Pilgrim 33

Well-Known Member
Apr 28, 2004
841
13
77
Texas
✟1,068.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
The Eulogists of Origen.

This chief Universalist of the centuries immediately succeeding the apostles was, by general consent, the most erudite and saintly of all the Christian fathers. Historians, scholars, critics, men of all shades of thought and opinion emulate one another in exalting his name, and praising his character. This volume could be filled with their eulogiums. Says one of the most judicious historians: "If any man deserves to stand first in the catalogue of saints and martyrs, and the be annually held up as an example to Christians, this is the man, for except the apostles of Jesus Christ, and their companions, I know of no one among all those enrolled and honored as saints who excel him in virtue and holiness." 1 A discriminating critic declares: "His work upon the text of Scripture alone would entitle Origen to undying gratitude. There has been no truly great man in the church who did not love him a little." 2 Bunsen remarks: "Origen's death is the real end of free Christianity, and in particular, of free intellectual theology." 3

The Tributes of Scholars.

The learned author of "The Martyrs and Apologists" truthfully observes: "Origen never swerved from this Christian magnanimity, and he remains the model of the theologian persecuted by haughty bigotry. Gentle as Fenelon under hierarchical anathemas, he maintained his convictions without faltering, and neither retracted nor rebelled. We may well say with the candid Tillemont that although such a man might hold heretical opinions he could not be a heretic, since he was utterly free from that spirit which constitutes the guilt of heresy." 4 Canon Westcott writes: "He examines with a reverence, an insight, a grandeur of feeling never surpassed, the questions of the inspiration and the interpretation of the Bible. The intellectual value of the work may best be characterized by one fact: a single sentence taken from it was quoted by Butler as containing the germ of his 'Analogy.' After sixteen hundred years we have not yet made good the positions which he marked out as belonging to the domain of Christian philosophy. * * * His whole life was 'one unbroken prayer' to use his own language of what an ideal life should be."5 The sober historian Lardner records only a candid appreciation of the man when he says: "He had the happiness of uniting different accomplishments, being at once the greatest preacher and the most learned and voluminous writer of the age; nor is it easy to say which is most admirable, his learning or his virtue." 6 Plumptre vies with Origen's other eulogists, and Farrar in all his remarkable books can never say enough in his praise. A brief extract from him will suffice: "The greatest of all the fathers, the most apostolic man since the days of the apostles, the father who on every branch of study rendered to the church the deepest and widest services--the immortal Origen. * * * The first writer, the profoundest thinker, the greatest educator, the most laborious critic, the most honored preacher, the holiest confessor of his age. We know no man in the whole Christian era, except St. Paul, who labored so incessantly, and rendered to the church such inestimable services. We know of no man, except St. Paul, who had to suffer from such black and bitter ingratitude. He, the converter of the heathen, the strengthener of the martyrs, the profoundest of Christian teachers, the greatest and most learned of the interpreters of Scripture--he to whom kings and bishops and philosophers had been proud to listen--he who had refuted the ablest of all the assailants of Christianity.--he who had founded the first school of Biblical exegesis and Biblical philology--he who had done more for the honor and the knowledge of the Oracles of God not only than all his assailants (for that is not saying much), but than all the then bishops and writers of the church put together--he who had known the Scriptures from infancy, who had vainly tried to grasp in boyhood the crown of martyrdom, who had been the honored teacher of saints, who had been all his life long a confessor--he in the very errors of whose life was more of nobleness than in the whole lives of his assailants,--who had lived a life more apostolic, who did more and suffered more for the truth of Christ than any man after the first century of our era, and whose accurately measurable services stand all but unapproachable by all the centuries--I, for one, will never mention the name of Origen without the love, and the admiration, and the reverence due to one of the greatest and one of the best of the saints of God."

A Catholic Eulogy.

Even modern Catholics--in spite of the ban of pope and council--join the great army of Origen's eulogists. Says the "Catholic World:"

"Alexandria, the cradle of Eastern genius at that time, became the Christian Thermopylæ, and Origen the Christian Leonidas. It was he who headed the forces, and, by the splendor of his genius, prepared in his school illustrations men to lead on the van. He vindicated the truth from calumny, supported it by facts, disengaged it from the sophisms in which enemies had obscured it, and held it up to view in all its natural beauty and attraction. * * * Heathens were delighted with his language, full of unction and charm, and the literati of the age, who had been lost in the intricacies of Aristotle, the obscurities of Plato, and the absurdities of Epicurus, wondered at the young Christian philosopher."7

Referring to the hard words that most advocates of universal redemption who are past middle life have received, Red. Edward Beecher, D.D., declares, in his "History of the Doctrine of Future Retribution:" "An evil spirit was developed at that time in putting down Origen which has ever since poisoned the church of all denominations. It has been as a leprosy in all Christendom. Nor is this all: measures were then resorted to for the suppression of error which exerted a deadly hostility against all free investigation, from the influence of which the church universal has not yet recovered."

The Encyclopedia Britannica, article Origen, (Prof. Adolf Harnack), voices the conclusions of the scholarly world:

"Of all the theologians of the ancient church, with the possible exception of Augustine, Origen is the most distinguished and the most influential. He is the father of the church's science; he is the founder of a theology which was brought to perfection in the Forth and Fifth Centuries, and which still retained the stamp of his genius when in the Sixth Century it disowned its author. It was Origen who created the dogmatic of the church and laid the foundations of the scientific criticism of the Old and New Testaments. He could not have been what he was unless two generations before him had labored at the problem of finding an intellectual expression and a philosophic basis for Christianity: (Justin, Tatian, Athenagoras, Pantænus, Clement.) But their attempts, in comparison with his, are like a schoolboy's essays beside the finished work of a master. * * * By proclaiming the reconciliation of science with the Christian faith, of the highest culture with the Gospel, Origen did more than any other man to win the Old World to the Christian religion. But he entered into no diplomatic compromises; it was his deepest and most solemn conviction that the sacred oracles of Christendom embraced all the ideals of antiquity. His character was as transparent as his life was blameless; there are few church fathers whose biography leaves so pure an impression on the reader. The atmosphere around him was a dangerous one for a philosopher and theologian to breathe, but he kept his spiritual health unimpaired and even his sense of truth suffered less injury than was the case with most of his contemporaries. * * * Orthodox theology has never, in any of these confessions, ventured beyond the circle which the mind of Origen first measured out."

Fourth Century Universalists Ideal Christians.

We conclude these eulogies, which might be multiplied indefinitely, by giving the high authority of Max Muller: "Origen was as honest as a Christian as he was as a philosopher, and it was this honesty which made Christianity victorious in the Third Century, and will make it victorious again whenever it finds supporters who are determined not to sacrifice their philosophical convictions to their religious faith or their religious faith to their philosophical convictions. * * * If we consider the time in which he lived, and study the testimony which his contemporaries bore of his character, we may well say of him, as of others who have been misjudged by posterity:

'Denn wer den Besten seiner Zeit genug gelebt,
Der hat genug gelebt fur alle Zeiten.'"
8


If any man since the death of Paul should rank as the patron saint of the Universalist church, it is the greatest and best of all the ancient fathers, Origen Adamantius.

Note.--It has been asserted that Origen did not actually teach the ultimate salvation of all souls, because he insisted that the human will is eternally free, and therefore it is argued that he must have held that souls may repent and be saved, and sin and fall forever. But this is not true, for Origen taught that at some period in the future, love and holiness will be so absorbed by all souls that, though, theoretically, they will be free, they will so will that lapse will be impossible. Jerome, Justinian, Dr. Pond, and others are explicitly confuted by the great scholar and saint. In his comments on Romans vi:9,10, he says: "The apostle decides, by an absolute decision, that now Christ dies no more, in order that those who live together with him may be secure of the endlessness of their life. * * * Free-will indeed remains, but the power of the cross suffices for all orders, and all ages, past and to come. And that free-will will not lead to sin, is plain, because love never faileth, and when God is loved with all the heart, and soul, and mind, and strength, and our neighbor as ourselves, where is the place for sin?" In his great work "De Principiis," he declares: "The nature of this body of ours will be changed into the glory of the spiritual body, in which state we are to believe that it will remain always and immutably by the will of the Creator," etc. Though Origen insisted that the human will must forever be free, he did not admit that the soul could abuse its freedom by continuing forever to lapse into sin.


1 Mosheim, Hist. Com. in Christ, before Constantine, ii, p. 149.

2 Christ. Plat. of Alex., p. 303.

3 Hipp. and his Age, pp. 285, 286.

4 Bunsen, pp. 326, 327.

5 Essays, pp. 236-252.

6 Cred. Gos. Hist., Vol. II, p. 486.

7 April, 1874.

8 Theos. or Psych. Rel. Lect. XIII.
 
Upvote 0

Pilgrim 33

Well-Known Member
Apr 28, 2004
841
13
77
Texas
✟1,068.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
daneel said:
Well, you've been busy I see. ;)

Did you have a web site to cite this with?

thanx.

<><

if you have fat pipes and an email address i'll email the book to you. it's about 670k when winzipped is about a 1/4meg. pm me if you (or anyone else) is interested.
 
Upvote 0

gort

pedantric
Sep 18, 2003
10,451
194
70
Visit site
✟34,392.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
if you have fat pipes and an email address i'll email the book to you. it's about 670k when winzipped is about a 1/4meg. pm me if you (or anyone else) is interested.

No need to. My work pipes are very fat, but the home one is not. But I did find some web sites regarding the compiler.

Are you well versed in ECF? I am not.

Irregardless, I would like to point to a post here, and I chose this one because I believe this fellow to be closest to the disciples of Jesus. The part that I bolded is where bias may start to come into effect from the compiler, Mr. Hanson. Perhaps I will research Polycarp, yet irregardless of outcome, who or what man can override what Jesus had to say?

By J.W. Hanson, D. D.-1899


Polycarp, a Destructionist.

Polycarp was bishop of the church in Smyrna, A.D. 108-117. He is thought to have been John's disciple. Irenæus tells us that he and Ignatius were friends of Peter and John, and related what they had told them. His only surviving epistle contains this passage: To Christ "all things are made subject, both that are in heaven and that are on earth; whom every living creature shall worship; who shall come to judge the quick and the dead; whose blood God shall require of them that believe not in him." He also says in the same chapter: "He who raised up Christ from the dead, will also raise us up if we do his will," implying that the resurrection depended, as he thought, on conduct in this life. It seems probable that he was one of those who held to the Pharisaic doctrine of a partial resurrection. And yet this is only the most probable conjecture. There is nothing decisive in his language. When the proconsul Statius Quadratus wrote to Polycarp, threatening him with burning, the saint replied "Thou threatenest me with a fire that burns for an hour, and is presently extinct, but art ignorant, alas! of the fire of aionian condemnation, and the judgment to come, reserved for the wicked in the other world." After Polycarp there was no literature, that has descended to us, for several years, except a few quotations in later writings, which, however, contain nothing bearing on our theme, from Papias, Quadratus, Agrippa, Castor, etc.

Also wanted to ask a question to you...."Do you believe the Bible to be the inerrant word of God regarding the salvation of man through Christ Jesus?

<><
 
Upvote 0

Pilgrim 33

Well-Known Member
Apr 28, 2004
841
13
77
Texas
✟1,068.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
daneel said:
No need to. My work pipes are very fat, but the home one is not. But I did find some web sites regarding the compiler.

Are you well versed in ECF? I am not.

Irregardless, I would like to point to a post here, and I chose this one because I believe this fellow to be closest to the disciples of Jesus. The part that I bolded is where bias may start to come into effect from the compiler, Mr. Hanson. Perhaps I will research Polycarp, yet irregardless of outcome, who or what man can override what Jesus had to say?

By J.W. Hanson, D. D.-1899


Polycarp, a Destructionist.

Polycarp was bishop of the church in Smyrna, A.D. 108-117. He is thought to have been John's disciple. Irenæus tells us that he and Ignatius were friends of Peter and John, and related what they had told them. His only surviving epistle contains this passage: To Christ "all things are made subject, both that are in heaven and that are on earth; whom every living creature shall worship; who shall come to judge the quick and the dead; whose blood God shall require of them that believe not in him." He also says in the same chapter: "He who raised up Christ from the dead, will also raise us up if we do his will," implying that the resurrection depended, as he thought, on conduct in this life. It seems probable that he was one of those who held to the Pharisaic doctrine of a partial resurrection. And yet this is only the most probable conjecture. There is nothing decisive in his language. When the proconsul Statius Quadratus wrote to Polycarp, threatening him with burning, the saint replied "Thou threatenest me with a fire that burns for an hour, and is presently extinct, but art ignorant, alas! of the fire of aionian condemnation, and the judgment to come, reserved for the wicked in the other world." After Polycarp there was no literature, that has descended to us, for several years, except a few quotations in later writings, which, however, contain nothing bearing on our theme, from Papias, Quadratus, Agrippa, Castor, etc.

Also wanted to ask a question to you...."Do you believe the Bible to be the inerrant word of God regarding the salvation of man through Christ Jesus?

<><

my apologies, three hours of sleep last night so i'm a little slow this morning, what is ecf?

well, i certainly do not regard anyone's work or words as the end all definitive answer. the Hanson quotes, imo, should be taken as far as can be shown to be true, nor should we ignore other scholoarly works. part of my purpose in the post quotes was to give background and not to just quibble over 1600 english words with our own personal beliefs, understandings and leanings based upon, for example, 2005 Webster definitions.

iow, if we are going to study the word of God let us indeed truly study the word of God and to hell with debating (read: arguing) for the validity of our own individual personal wannabe prideful desires. Following that thin thread of Truth WHEREVER it may lead even (and especially!) if it goes against anything and everything we ever thought or believed to be so should be our goal. Without such an attitude one can never be a submissive, willing and teachable follower of Christ Jesus.

i believe the word of God is contained (to whatever degree each version has allowed it) in numerous versions. i do not believe any version is 100% pure, complete and without error or additions. The word of God is God's work and product alone, compiled by God-inspired writers of an earlier bygone era; but the versions themselves are another matter and, being the product of, essentially, rewriters and "re-VISION-ers" that can never claim to have the pure and complete "vision" of God but, instead, contain the "revisioners" own biases, beliefs and flawed and/or error ridden understandings.

there is no way, for example, that the NIV with all its humanistic alterations is the pure, complete and unadulterated word of God; and neither is the KJV with all it's catholic and middle ages carry overs the pure, complete and unadulterated word of God. and, yet, the word of God, itself, IS and always shall be the only pure, complete and unadulterated word of God and shall forever stand on its own.

2 Timothy 2:15, "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Flynmonkie
Upvote 0

gort

pedantric
Sep 18, 2003
10,451
194
70
Visit site
✟34,392.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
my apologies, three hours of sleep last night so i'm a little slow this morning, what is ecf?

Maybe 5 for me. ecf refers to early church fathers

well, i certainly do not regard anyone's work or words as the end all definitive answer. the Hanson quotes, imo, should be taken as far as can be shown to be true, nor should we ignore other scholoarly works. part of my purpose in the post quotes was to give background and not to just quibble over 1600 english words with our own personal beliefs, understandings and leanings based upon, for example, 2005 Webster definitions.

I would agree. I will take the meaning of the bible over all others. When I use strongs for the meanings of these words, I use them to simply find the context in which that word is used. I am not knowledgable regarding the greek.

The word "love" has many meanings in the greek it would appear. agape love is different than eros love. The word "everlasting" has a different sense of meaning in relation to God than it does to man.

iow, if we are going to study the word of God let us indeed truly study the word of God and to hell with debating (read: arguing) for the validity of our own individual personal wannabe prideful desires. Following that thin thread of Truth WHEREVER it may lead even (and especially!) if it goes against anything and everything we ever thought or believed to be so should be our goal. Without such an attitude one can never be a submissive, willing and teachable follower of Christ Jesus.

I have no problem with that, but am constrained to the gospel. One verse taken out of context does not prove a belief. Everything must be taken in context in it's entirety throughout the bible in the primary things of God. That would be God's plan of salvation for man through His Son Jesus the Christ. Secondary things, which are debateable and most times vain arguements would be such as proper methods of baptism, amongst others.


i believe the word of God is contained (to whatever degree each version has allowed it) in numerous versions. i do not believe any version is 100% pure, complete and without error or additions. The word of God is God's work and product alone, compiled by God-inspired writers of an earlier bygone era; but the versions themselves are another matter and, being the product of, essentially, rewriters and "re-VISION-ers" that can never claim to have the pure and complete "vision" of God but, instead, contain the "revisioners" own biases, beliefs and flawed and/or error ridden understandings.

I believe with perfect faith that the Word of God is Holy Spirit inspired. God sets the path and directs a man in that path, to accomplish God's will. I believe God moved men to select certain book to be put together as one, know as the bible. I don't know if you've ever written or spoken by the Holy Spirit, but it is something wonderful and a man simply cannot goof it up when under that power. The bible attests to the witness of Christ Jesus, which is, as Jesus said, is what the Holy Spirit will do. I find this theme throughout the NT.

:)

<><
 
Upvote 0

disciple00

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2004
441
7
guatemala
✟617.00
Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
daneel said:
Who said they are being resurrected to life? Where does it say that?
to assume that somebody can be resurrected into death is kind of ubsurd don't you think, seeing as how they were dead beforehand?



They don't have eternal life
how then could they suffer? remember that the bible says ''the dead know nothing'' how then can someone being dead know eternal punishment?


Where does it say "destroyed"?
well asi said in another thread on this same topic, how is it possible for things sucha s pain to exist when it says in revelation 21 that there won't be any more pain, tears, death etc.



They're not in the new heaven and new earth. They are outside of it.
actually if you read the scripture that refers to the new heavens and the new earth, it is all inclusive, i.e. the old creation is no more and all things are made new.



The old creation is burnt up.
ok, how then can these folk getting tormentes eternally still be in the old creation if it nolonger exists, or how then can pain and death exist in the new creation?



Scripture says death and hell are cast into the lake of fire.
right, so the lake fo fire can't be hell can it?





Where does the bible say the soul is made of dust?
it says in genesis that God made man fo the dust and breathed the breath of life into him and he BECAME a living soul.. hence, dust is in the mix..



hmmm....God's everlasting torture chamber. Well, how many times did Jesus warn and talk about outer darkness, hell, and lost souls? The concept is very biblical.
didn't Jesus also say the the good sheperd woudl leave the 99 and look for the LOST sheep? also hell litterally means ''unseen'' and outer darkness, hmm, doy ou think the lake of fire pruduces light of any kind or is it dark fire?


Well, Joshua said, "Choose ye now whom you will serve...."
right, but jesus said ''ye have not chosen me but i have chosen you''
also i would like to poitn you reader to what paul spoke of predestination, and also, read romans chapter 9 and tell me if we choose God, or if it is God who chooses us (from before the time we were made)

And we also have this:

Jhn 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
great scripture, i am totally in agreement. please read this one too.
3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; 4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; 6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

Jhn 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
again, great verse eh? now, if God sent jesus to save the world, who in the world won't be saved ?

Jhn 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
right, but remember what jesus said, that htose who believe in hom pass from death unto life, aren't the wages of sin death?.

Jhn 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
you see, God wll give mankind a new nature.. he even promised it back in the OT here it is
A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.

When I look at the Cross, I see both God's mercy, and I see God's Justice.

I see His love for us, but I also see His hatred of sin.

And no sin can dwell in His presence.
that's why God destroyed sin at the cross. you see, the key here is that certainly not all men believe at this moment in time, so it is hard to believe that all men shall be saved, because theere are still many many sinners. but remember that God has declared the end from the beginning, God shall do all his pleasure, and it pleases him to save mankind.

disciple00
 
Upvote 0

disciple00

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2004
441
7
guatemala
✟617.00
Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Soul Searcher said:
People seem to assume that since the devil will be tormented there for ever and ever that all in the lake will be also but this is just an assumption and IMO a bad one. It truly does not say what effect the lake will have on any man, nor how long they will be there. It is possible that the lake is actually the presence of God, he is described as fire many times, judgement is also described as fire where by the evil works will be burned and good works will be purified. Paul says everymans works will be revealed by fire, if a mans works survive the fire he will be rewarded, if a mans works burn up he shall suffer loss but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire.
good post man, i do have a commentto add.

Jesus said he would baptize by fire.... hmm just a thought for the ear to chew on

regards

disciple00
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.