Origen - gnostic?

[AndyN]

Hello all,
I'm doing an essay on Origen (due in friday - eeek), and thought his theology seemed somewhat gnostic in character. Platonic throught does seem to over-influence his thought and crazy speculation!
Can anybody recommend any articles/books/links?
any thoughts, opinions wanted! :o)

[technomage]

Hello all,
I'm doing an essay on Origen (due in friday - eeek), and thought his theology seemed somewhat gnostic in character. Platonic throught does seem to over-influence his thought and crazy speculation!
Can anybody recommend any articles/books/links?
any thoughts, opinions wanted! :o)
Hi, Andy.

I'm not sure that one could really call Origen a gnostic. To be sure, both Origen and Gnosticism drew from similar wells (Origen from Plato, Gnosticism from Plato as re-interpreted by Plotinus), and Origen definitely did get into some fairly wild speculation, but I really can't see a cause and effect relationship.

Neo-Platonic thought (along with Stoicism) was "the big thing" during Origen's time, yet Origen preached specifically against the Gnostic view of an "evil creation" and an "evil creator." In many respects, Origen is seen as the reason that "orthodox" Christianity won out over Gnosticism and Paganism.

Here's a good source on views of Origen's writings (http://religion.rutgers.edu/nt/primer/origen.html). I'm sure there are more available through Google.

Justin

[AndyN]

Hi,
thanks for your reply. What struck me was the way Origen's theology of creation meant that the material world was created when humans sinned (being previously just spiritual). Although he seems to argue against the gnostic's negative view of the material world in other literature, this creation idea, along with his hierarchical view of beings (spiritual being higher than material bodies) not only backs up Platonist Dualism, but is dangerously close to acknowledging gnostic dualism. Is this a typical Origen paradox?
Not sure If I am making sense...

[technomage]

Hi,
thanks for your reply. What struck me was the way Origen's theology of creation meant that the material world was created when humans sinned (being previously just spiritual). Although he seems to argue against the gnostic's negative view of the material world in other literature, this creation idea, along with his hierarchical view of beings (spiritual being higher than material bodies) not only backs up Platonist Dualism, but is dangerously close to acknowledging gnostic dualism. Is this a typical Origen paradox?
Not sure If I am making sense...
Oh, no, you're being quite clear, considering the subject. Origen would be considered nothing less than heretical today, and (IMO) anything based on Platonic cosmology contains far more paradox than common sense. :smile:

In many regards, Origen could best be described as "halting between two opinions," in that he tried to combine Plato's philosophy (most especially, that humanity could attain said knowledge by the individual's own effort) with Christian teachings on Christ. Thus he held a hierarchal view of the Trinity (that God the Father was of a higher order than the Son or the Holy Spirit), pre-existence of the soul (something he nabbed direcftly from Plato), and Universalism. He was never declared a heretic, but at the same time he was also never canonized, and the RCC does not list him among the CHuirch Fathers (Orthodox does).

Thus, this is not the only paradox that Origen engages in. Origen absolutely rejected the Docetists, yet his teachings on the nature of Christ borrowed heavily from Docetism. He argued against Gnosticism, yet accepted the Emanation theory of creation, and the concept of the Logos. He rejected Plotinist Dualism, yet accepted material as an "accidental" creation caused by the fall--thus matter was not evil, but was never intended. Origen is definitely a strange duck.

However, there are some things that Origen was well within orthodox doctrine on. Sometime in the seventies some Theosophist (I don't remember his name, I fear) started writing that Origen believed in reincarnation: this is not the case, as Origen explicitly rejected "transmigration," as he referred to it. (It should also be noted that the Theosophist in question asserts that Origen wrote about his reincarnation theories, but that all the documents were destroyed ... gee, where have I heard that before?)

Justin

[AndyN]

thanks Justin. This guy certainly was an odd one.
I'm trying to pin him down, find some clever reason why his theology was so strange/extreme/heretic, but can't. Was he perhaps a mystical platonist/Gnostic, using a fake orthodox front to bring in his heretic teachings? Or did he genuinly believe Platonism was the true worldview in which to present christianity, and just got in a bit of a theological tangle?
I was starting to think Origen was into reeincarnation before I read your post. Doesn't reeincarnation fit into the platonist worldview?

Maybe his lost books filled in the gaps (as well as describing a worldwide conspiracy involving chocolate rabbits) hehe.