Quotes from early Church Fathers in support of Apokatastasis

Todd

Star
Joined
Apr 16, 2017
Messages
2,525
Universal Reconciliation has been labeled a heretical doctrine by a good portion of Christians on this forum. This thread is intended to be a compilation of quotes from early church fathers to prove that Apokatastasis was an accepted and rarely refuted doctrine of the early Church. Even amongst the Church Fathers who did not proactively teach UR, there is a surprising lack of evidence from any of them that they considered it heretical. Even Irenaeus’ lengthy second-century book entitled Against Heresies is lacking any refute of a doctrine that was well known at the time.

I will continue to add to this thread on a regular basis.
And God showed great kindness to man, in this, that He did not suffer him to continue being in sin forever; but as it were, by a kind of banishement, cast him out of paradise in order that, having punishment expiated within an appointed time, and having been disciplined, he should afterwards be recalled...just as a vessel, when one being fashioned it has some flaw, is remoulded or remade that it may become new and entire; so also it happens to man by death. For he is broken up by force, that in the resurrection he may be found whole; I mean spotless, righteous and immortal. --Theophilus of Antioch (168 A.D.)
In the end and consummation of the Universe all are to be restored into their original harmonious state, and we all shall be made one body and be united once more into a perfect man and the prayer of our Savior shall be fulfilled that all may be one. --St. Jerome, 331-420
For it is evident that God will in truth be all in all when there shall be no evil in existence, when every created being is at harmony with iteself and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord; when every creature shall have been made one body. --Gregory of Nyssa, 335-390
We can set no limits to the agency of the Redeemer to redeem, to rescue, to discipline in his work, and so will he continue to operate after this life. –Clement of Alexandria
Do not suppose that the soul is punished for endless eons (apeirou aionas) in Tartarus. Very properly, the soul is not punished to gratify the revenge of the divinity, but for the sake of healing. But we say that the soul is punished for an aionion period (aionios) calling its life and its allotted period of punishment, its aeon. --Olnmpiodorus (AD 550)
Our Savior has appointed two kinds of resurrection in the Apocalypse. 'Blessed is he that hath part in the first resurrection,' for such come to grace without the judgment. As for those who do not come to the first, but are reserved unto the second resurrection, these shall be disciplined until their appointed times, between the first and the second resurrection.-- Ambrose, Bishop of Milan (340-397 A.D.)
All men are Christ's, some by knowing Him, the rest not yet. He is the Savior, not of some and the rest not. For how is He Savior and Lord, if not the Savior and Lord of all?—Clement of Alexandria
 

Daciple

Star
Joined
Apr 25, 2017
Messages
1,157
Universal Reconciliation has been labeled a heretical doctrine by a good portion of Christians on this forum.
Because it is.

This thread is intended to be a compilation of quotes from early church fathers to prove that Apokatastasis was an accepted and rarely refuted doctrine of the early Church.
By Early you mean what 200-250+ years after Christ and after the heretic Origen popularized it? By Church Fathers you mean the Catholic Popes and Priests? Thats not the Early Church my friend, try pulling quotes from the Apostolic Fathers, good luck...

Even amongst the Church Fathers who did not proactively teach UR, there is a surprising lack of evidence from any of them that they considered it heretical. Even Irenaeus’ lengthy second-century book entitled Against Heresies is lacking any refute of a doctrine that was well known at the time.
Should probably retrack that statement sir:

and that He should execute just judgment towards all; that He may send spiritual wickednesses, Ephesians 6:12 and the angels who transgressed and became apostates, together with the ungodly, and unrighteous, and wicked, and profane among men, into everlasting fire; - Against Heresies (Book I, Chapter 10)

To which course many nations of those barbarians who believe in Christ do assent, having salvation written in their hearts by the Spirit, without paper or ink, and, carefully preserving the ancient tradition, believing in one God, the Creator of heaven and earth, and all things therein, by means of Christ Jesus, the Son of God; who, because of His surpassing lovetowards His creation, condescended to be born of the virgin, He Himself uniting man through Himself to God, and having suffered under Pontius Pilate, and rising again, and having been received up in splendour, shall come in glory, the Saviour of those who are saved, and the Judge of those who are judged, and sending into eternal fire those who transform the truth, and despise His Father and His advent. - Against Heresies (Book III Chapter 4)

For as, in the New Testament, that faith of men [to be placed] in God has been increased, receiving in addition [to what was already revealed] the Son of God, that man too might be a partaker of God; so is also our walk in life required to be more circumspect, when we are directed not merely to abstain from evil actions, but even from evil thoughts, and from idle words, and empty talk, and scurrilous language: thus also the punishment of those who do not believe the Word of God, and despise His advent, and are turned away backwards, is increased; being not merely temporal, but rendered also eternal. For to whomsoever the Lord shall say, Depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire, Matthew 25:41 these shall be damned for ever - Against Heresies (Book IV Chapter 28)

For the self-same heretics already mentioned by us have fallen away from themselves, by accusing the Lord, in whom they say that they believe. For those points to which they call attention with regard to the God who then awarded temporal punishments to the unbelieving, and smote the Egyptians, while He saved those that were obedient; these same [facts, I say,] shall nevertheless repeat themselves in the Lord, who judges for eternity those whom He does judge, and lets go free for eternity those whom He does let go free - Against Heresies (Book IV Chapter 28)

Unless, then, the Jews had become the slayers of the Lord (which did, indeed, take eternal life away from them) - Against Heresies (Book IV Chapter 28)

What is the case more than likely is that this was yet to be a prevalent teaching until Origen thus there was no need to spend ample time refuting it, basically all the Early Church Fathers before Origen believed in Eternal Punishment. As for your quote concerning Theophilus of Antioch, you should probably study what his actual position is, because you clearly took that out of context, he definitely is NOT propagandizing your False Doctrine. Here is his actual position:

"Give studious attention to the prophetic writings [the Bible] and they will lead you on a clearer path to escape the eternal punishments and to obtain the eternal good things of God.. [God] will examine everything and will judge justly, granting recompense to each according to merit. To those who seek immortality by the patient exercise of good works, he will give everlasting life, joy, peace, rest, and all good things.. For the unbelievers and for the contemptuous, and for those who do not submit to the truth but assent to iniquity, when they have been involved in adulteries, and fornications, and homosexualities, and avarice, and in lawless idolatries, there will be wrath and indignation, tribulation and anguish; and in the end, such men as these will be detained in everlasting fire Since you said, “Show me thy God,” this is my God, and I counsel you to fear Him and to trust Him." (To Autolycus1:14 [A.D. 181]).

He clearly believes in Eternal Punishment and Everlasting Fire, if one simply reads your original quote of him he is simply stating that God didnt keep Adam and Eve in the Garden so that they and thus ALL of Humanity would NEVER be able to be redeemed. Instead He kicked them out so that they could partake in the Resurrection of Christ and become saved. I suggest doing your due diligence before quote mining and copying and pasting from other sites that also propagate your False Doctrine...

I guess as you continue to update this with Post Origen Roman Catholic Church people, I will continue to post Apostolic aka Pre Roman Catholic Pre Origen quotes of the actual Early Church whom all agreed that UR is garbage and there was and is an Eternal Hell/Lake of Fire/Punishment...
 

Rec

Rookie
Joined
Jan 7, 2018
Messages
38
"I haven't read the Church Fathers so I'm just going to copy-paste someone's uncited selection of quotes without providing the citation." - Todd
 

Todd

Star
Joined
Apr 16, 2017
Messages
2,525
I've seen quite a few people around the world arguing semantics about the nature of hell.
I hope no one minds me asking, but why does it matter whether it's eternal, temporal, metaphorical, literal and everything in between?
It's kind of like wondering whether the sun is physical, holographic, how hot is it exactly, etc?
Since I don't have any intention of going to the sun, why should that weigh so heavily on my mind?

How does it affect your walk with God knowing the precise conditions of hell?



Again I hope no one cusses me out for asking, I'm just genuinely curious
Because it’s an accusation against the character of God himself. There is nothing just, merciful or loving about a God who would punish his own creation for finite sins with infinite torment.
 

floss

Star
Joined
Mar 26, 2017
Messages
2,255
It all make sense now, Todd is a closet Catholics which is why he believe in Faith + Work salvation, Universal Reconciliation (Purgatory) and going back to some Church "Father" for his Hell doctrine. There is only ONE FATHER and he is in heaven. I don't believe you were a Pastor, more so a catholic priest.
 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
13,981
Universal Reconciliation has been labeled a heretical doctrine by a good portion of Christians on this forum. This thread is intended to be a compilation of quotes from early church fathers to prove that Apokatastasis was an accepted and rarely refuted doctrine of the early Church. Even amongst the Church Fathers who did not proactively teach UR, there is a surprising lack of evidence from any of them that they considered it heretical. Even Irenaeus’ lengthy second-century book entitled Against Heresies is lacking any refute of a doctrine that was well known at the time.

I will continue to add to this thread on a regular basis.
@Todd

Serious question...

Why would you make any effort with evangelism, why would you "contend" for the faith, why indeed would Jesus tell his disciples to go into all the world if everyone would "make it" anyway?

What of missionaries who gave their lives and martyrs who gladly burned for the truths you seem so eager to dispense with?
 

Todd

Star
Joined
Apr 16, 2017
Messages
2,525
@Daciple
I never claimed Iranaeus was a proponent of UR. I simply stated he did not feel it necessary to devote any length of argument specifically against the doctrine of UR which was prevelant at the time.

To Him is placed in subjection all the host of angels and gods; He, the paternal Word, exhibiting a the holy administration for Him who put all in subjection to Him.

Wherefore also all men are His; some through knowledge, and others not yet so; and some as friends, some as faithful servants, some as servants merely. ....

And how is He Saviour and Lord, if not the Saviour and Lord of all? But He is the Saviour of those who have believed, because of their wishing to know; and the Lord of those who have not believed, till, being enabled to confess him, they obtain the peculiar and appropriate boon which comes by Him. (Stromata 7.2) Clement of Alexandria
@Todd

Serious question...

Why would you make any effort with evangelism, why would you "contend" for the faith, why indeed would Jesus tell his disciples to go into all the world if everyone would "make it" anyway?

What of missionaries who gave their lives and martyrs who gladly burned for the truths you seem so eager to dispense with?
Because I want people to know about the good news of Jesus Christ in this lifetime. Because freedom in Christ is better than living in sin. When Christian's ask this question, I can't help but wonder what their relationship with Christ is like, because they seem to imply that if the penalty of hell did not exist, that they would rather not live for God. Is your motivation to follow Christ based solely on wanting to escape hell?

I want to see the power of Jesus lead people to overcome sin in this lifetime.

Though hell is not eternal, it still does not seem pleasant that I would want anyone to experience.

I contend for the faith, becuase I am grateful that Jesus died so I can be free from sin. I contend for the faith because life in christ is so much better living under the curse of sin.

Missonaries give their life for belief in hell? I though they died to fulfill the great commission and make disciples.

I am not dispensing of any truth. The truth is that Jesus died for the sins of the whole world, not just those that believe. The truth is that the bible makes it clear God's plan is the restitution and reconcilation of ALL things. The truth is that EVERY knee will bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Do you really believe that sinners burning in hell are going to bow and confess Jesus as Lord and that it will bring Glory to God?
 

Todd

Star
Joined
Apr 16, 2017
Messages
2,525
God can't reconcile with Himself something corrupt, He would stop being holy, just.
Think of cancer, a cancer cell at its birth has the same blueprint and origin as a healthy cell, but no one can cohabitate with cancer, it has to be removed/eliminated from your person if you want to keep being healthy.
It pains Him to depart from us as well, like it hurts to remove cancer but there's no choice for Him, it was ours
You are right God can 't reconcile with something corrupt. That is why the unbelievers are thrown in the Lake of Fire. Fire is used throughout the Bible to describe the purification process of God. The lake of fire is also described as sulfur. Did you know that sulfur is used with fire to purify and refine Gold?

Your cancer analogy is awesome. Sin is a cancer. The difference between beleivers and unbelievers is that we go through the process of purfication and sanctification in this lifetime.

Anyway, please ignore my reply if you find it dumb, inappropriate. I'm not a Bible wizz, I haven't finished it yet.
Not dumb or inappropriate at all. You are asking honest questions.
 

Todd

Star
Joined
Apr 16, 2017
Messages
2,525
From the Book by J. W. Hanson, first published in 1899:
"Universalism: The Prevailing Doctrine of the Christian Church During Its First Five Hundred Years"

During the First Century the primitive Christians did not dwell on matters of eschatology, but devoted their attention to apologetics; they were chiefly anxious to establish the fact of Christ's advent, and of its blessings to the world. Possibly the question of destiny was an open one, till Paganism and Judaism introduced erroneous ideas, when the New Testament doctrine of the apokatastasis was asserted, and universal restoration became an accepted belief, as stated later by Clement and Origen,

A.D. 180-230.
The Catacombs give us the views of the unlearned, as Clement and Origen state the doctrine of scholars and teachers. Not a syllable is found hinting at the horrors of Augustinianism, but the inscription on every monument harmonizes with the Universalism of the early fathers.
Clement declares that all punishment, however severe, is purificatory; that even the "torments of the damned" are curative. Origen explains even Gehenna as signifying limited and curative punishment, and both, as all the other ancient Universalists, declare that "everlasting" (aionion) punishment, is consonant with universal salvation.
So that it is no proof that other primitive Christians who are less explicit as to the final result, taught endless punishment when they employ the same terms.

Like our Lord and his Apostles, the primitive Christians avoided the words with which the Pagans and Jews defined endless punishment aidios or adialeipton timoria (endless torment), a doctrine the latter believed, and knew how to describe; but they, the early Christians, called punishment, as did our Lord, kolasis aionios, discipline, chastisement, of indefinite, limited duration.
The early Christians taught that Christ preached the Gospel to the dead, and for that purpose descended into Hades. Many held that he released all who were in ward. This shows that repentance beyond the grave, perpetual probation, was then accepted, which precludes the modern error that the soul's destiny is decided at death.

The first comparatively complete systematic statement of Christian doctrine ever given to the world was by Clement of Alexandria,
A.D. 180, and universal salvation was one of the tenets.
The first complete presentation of Christianity as a system was by Origen (A.D. 220) and universal salvation was explicitly contained in it.
Universal salvation was the prevailing doctrine in Christendom as long as Greek, the language of the New Testament, was the language of Christendom.
Universalism was generally believed in the best centuries, the first three, when Christians were most remarkable for simplicity, goodness and missionary zeal.

Universalism was least known when Greek, the language of the New Testament was least known, and when Latin was the language of the Church in its darkest, most ignorant, and corrupt ages.
Not a writer among those who describe the heresies of the first three hundred years intimates that Universalism was then a heresy, though it was believed by many, if not be a majority, and certainly by the greatest of the fathers.
Not a single creed for five hundred years expresses any idea contrary to universal restoration, or in favor of endless punishment.
With the exception of the arguments of Augustine (A.D. 420), there is not an argument known to have been framed against Universalism for at least four hundred years after Christ, by any of the ancient fathers.
While the councils that assembled in various parts of Christendom, anathematized every kind of doctrine supposed to be heretical, no ecumenical council, for more than five hundred years, condemned Universalism, though it had been advocated in every century by the principal scholars and most revered saints.

As late as A.D. 400, Jerome says "most people" (plerique). and Augustine "very many" (quam plurimi), believed in Universalism, notwithstanding that the tremendous influence of Augustine, and the mighty power of the semi-pagan secular arm were arrayed against it.

The principal ancient Universalists were Christian born and reared, and were among the most scholarly and saintly of all the ancient saints.
The most celebrated of the earlier advocates of endless punishment were heathen born, and led corrupt lives in their youth. Tertullian one of the first, and Augustine, the greatest of them, confess to having been among the vilest.
The first advocates of endless punishment, Minucius Felix, Tertullian and Augustine, were Latins, ignorant of Greek, and less competent to interpret the meaning of Greek Scriptures than were the Greek scholars.
The first advocates of Universalism, after the Apostles, were Greeks, in whose mother-tongue the New Testament was written. They found their Universalism in the Greek Bible. Who should be correct, they or the Latins?
The Greek Fathers announced the great truth of universal restoration in an age of darkness, sin and corruption. There was nothing to suggest it to them in the world's literature or religion. It was wholly contrary to everything around them. Where else could they have found it, but where they say they did, in the Gospel?
All ecclesiastical historians and the best Biblical critics and scholars agree to the prevalence of Universalism in the earlier centuries.

From the days of Clement of Alexandria to those of Gregory of Nyssa and Theodore of Mopsuestia (A.D. 180-428), the great theologians and teachers, almost without exception, were Universalists. No equal number in the same centuries were comparable to them for learning and goodness.
The first theological school in Christendom, that in Alexandria, taught Universalism for more than two hundred years.

In all Christendom, from A.D. 170 to 430, there were six Christian schools. Of these four, the only strictly theological schools, taught Universalism, and but one endless punishment.
The three earliest Gnostic sects, the Basilidians, the Carpocratians and the Valentinians (A.D. 117-132) are condemned by Christian writers, and their heresies pointed out, but though they taught Universalism, that doctrine is never condemned by those who oppose them. Irenaeus condemned the errors of the Carpocratians, but does not reprehend their Universalism, though he ascribes the doctrine to them.
The first defense of Christianity against Infidelity (Origen against Celsus) puts the defense on Universalistic grounds. Celsus charged the Christians' God with cruelty, because he punished with fire. Origen replied that God's fire is curative; that he is a "Consuming Fire," because he consumes sin and not the sinner.

Origen, the chief representative of Universalism in the ancient centuries, was bitterly opposed and condemned for various heresies by ignorant and cruel fanatics. He was accused of opposing Episcopacy, believing in pre-existence, etc., but never was condemned for his Universalism. The very council that anathematized "Origenism" eulogized Gregory of Nyssa, who was explicitly a Universalist as was Origen. Lists of his errors are given by Methodius, Pamphilus and Eusebius, Marcellus, Eustathius and Jerome, but Universalism is not named by one of his opponents. Fancy a list of Ballou's errors and his Universalism omitted; Hippolytus (A.D. 320) names thirty-two known heresies, but Universalism is not mentioned as among them. Epiphanius, "the hammer of heretics," describes eighty heresies, but he does not mention universal salvation, though Gregory of Nyssa, an outspoken Universalist, was, at the time he wrote, the most conspicuous figure in Christendom.

Justinian, a half-pagan emperor, who attempted to have Universalism officially condemned, lived in the most corrupt epoch of the Christian centuries. He closed the theological schools, and demanded the condemnation of Universalism by law; but the doctrine was so prevalent in the church that the council refused to obey his edict to suppress it. Lecky says the age of Justinian was "the worst form civilization has assumed."
The first clear and definite statement of human destiny by any Christian writer after the days of the Apostles, includes universal restoration, and that doctrine was advocated by most of the greatest and best of the Christian Fathers for the first five hundred years of the Christian Era.

In one word, a careful study of the early history of the Christian religion, will show that the doctrine of universal restoration was least prevalent in the darkest, and prevailed most in the most enlightened, of the earliest centuries--that it was the prevailing doctrine in the Primitive Christian Church.
 

Kung Fu

Superstar
Joined
Mar 24, 2017
Messages
5,087
It all make sense now, Todd is a closet Catholics which is why he believe in Faith + Work salvation, Universal Reconciliation (Purgatory) and going back to some Church "Father" for his Hell doctrine. There is only ONE FATHER and he is in heaven. I don't believe you were a Pastor, more so a catholic priest.
Those are a lot of assumptions there buddy boy.
 
Joined
Mar 22, 2017
Messages
3,150
I used to think that was cruel as well, but hell wasn't created for us, if we choose to follow the Devil to the place that was prepared for him is not God's fault, we have the freedom to choose which one we call our father, the Devil or God? He could have made us like robots and then we would have always resided with Him. no free will = no choices. no choices = no way to err
Also, there are many people who affirm that there are different "levels'' of hell based on the book of Enoch and on many Near Death testimonies were some claimed that they just suffered the removal of God's grace, it was not eternal phisical torture but it was unbearable, excruciating soul-wise. I think that they mentioned even in the Bible that the more we would know and chose to do wicked, the more liable we are, the harder it will be for us in the afterlife.
And God was beyond merciful and loving through the incommensurable sacrifice that provided us with available salvation out of this very corrupting world.
God can't reconcile with Himself something corrupt, He would stop being holy, just.
Think of cancer, a cancer cell at its birth has the same blueprint and origin as a healthy cell, but no one can cohabitate with cancer, it has to be removed/eliminated from your person if you want to keep being healthy.
It pains Him to depart from us as well, like it hurts to remove cancer but there's no choice for Him, it was ours

Anyway, please ignore my reply if you find it dumb, inappropriate. I'm not a Bible wizz, I haven't finished it yet.
Wow, you sure do have a great command of the English language for someone who's not a native speaker. Did you speak English in your home from an early age?
 

Rec

Rookie
Joined
Jan 7, 2018
Messages
38
It all make sense now, Todd is a closet Catholics which is why he believe in Faith + Work salvation, Universal Reconciliation (Purgatory) and going back to some Church "Father" for his Hell doctrine. There is only ONE FATHER and he is in heaven. I don't believe you were a Pastor, more so a catholic priest.
"4. When any word hath divers significations, that to be kept which has been most commonly used by the most eminent fathers, being agreeable to the propriety of the place, and the analogy of the faith." - King James' instructions to the translators. (http://www.kjvonly.org/other/kj_instructs.htm)

"But what mention we three or four uses of the Scripture, whereas whatsoever is to be believed or practised, or hoped for, is contained in them? or three or four sentences of the Fathers, since whosoever is worthy the name of a Father, from Christ's time downward, hath likewise written not only of the riches, but also of the perfection of the Scripture?" - Preface to the King James Bible 5:11 (https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Bible_(King_James)/Preface)

"This moved S.Hierome [Jerome], a most learned father, and the best linguist without controversy, of his age, or of any that went before him, to undertake the translating of the Old Testament, out of the very fountains themselves; which he performed with that evidence of great learning, judgement, industry, and faithfulness, that he hath for ever bound the Church unto him, in a debt of special remembrance and thankfulness." - Ibid. 8:4... The translators lauding St. Jerome for his translation of the Latin Vulgate.
 

Vytas

Star
Joined
Jun 29, 2017
Messages
1,904
It all make sense now, Todd is a closet Catholics which is why he believe in Faith + Work salvation, Universal Reconciliation (Purgatory) and going back to some Church "Father" for his Hell doctrine. There is only ONE FATHER and he is in heaven. I don't believe you were a Pastor, more so a catholic priest.
Catholic priests keeps celibate...And you can't simply stop being catholic priest, you need permission from pope, which is given only in very special circumstances...
 

elsbet

Superstar
Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
5,122
"4. When any word hath divers significations, that to be kept which has been most commonly used by the most eminent fathers, being agreeable to the propriety of the place, and the analogy of the faith." - King James' instructions to the translators. (http://www.kjvonly.org/other/kj_instructs.htm)

"But what mention we three or four uses of the Scripture, whereas whatsoever is to be believed or practised, or hoped for, is contained in them? or three or four sentences of the Fathers, since whosoever is worthy the name of a Father, from Christ's time downward, hath likewise written not only of the riches, but also of the perfection of the Scripture?" - Preface to the King James Bible 5:11 (https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Bible_(King_James)/Preface)

"This moved S.Hierome [Jerome], a most learned father, and the best linguist without controversy, of his age, or of any that went before him, to undertake the translating of the Old Testament, out of the very fountains themselves; which he performed with that evidence of great learning, judgement, industry, and faithfulness, that he hath for ever bound the Church unto him, in a debt of special remembrance and thankfulness." - Ibid. 8:4... The translators lauding St. Jerome for his translation of the Latin Vulgate.
".. out of the very fountains of themselves."

Hm.. smells like Pharisee.
 

Daciple

Star
Joined
Apr 25, 2017
Messages
1,157
which was prevelant at the time.
Actually no it wasnt prevalent, it didnt become prevalent until Origen and his boy Clement of Alexandra you know just like the quote you provided says.

when the New Testament doctrine of the apokatastasis was asserted, and universal restoration became an accepted belief, as stated later by Clement and Origen,

A.D. 180-230.
The Catacombs give us the views of the unlearned, as Clement and Origen state the doctrine of scholars and teachers.
Would probably help to read the stuff you are quoting so you can stay consistent with what you say, that is twice that you misquoted or asserted something that has either been disproven by your own source or has been disproven by simply reading what the source actually has to say concerning this false doctrine. I mean the fact that this was created and espoused by these 2 says much, in fact Origen was ex communicated by the same people you are going to end up quoting for support of UR. What does that say about the root of this ideology? Quite a bit if you ask me, Origen was insane and a heretic, he was basically a closet Gnostic, he castrated himself I mean yeah anything that stems from him I am good with...
 

Todd

Star
Joined
Apr 16, 2017
Messages
2,525
@Daciple
Very impressive using gossip, slander and accusation to judge doctrine LOL!
https://medievalhistorygeek.wordpress.com/2014/02/09/did-origen-castrate-himself/
Eusebius also alleged that Origen, as a young man, castrated himself so as to work freely in instructing female catechumens; but this was not the only story told by the malicious about his extraordinary chastity, and thus it may merely have been hostile gossip
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Origen
But whatever...I'm not holding up Origen as the end all, be all of Christian theology. He is simply one of many Christian scholars and theologians thoughout Christian history who present UR from the bible.
 
Last edited:

Rec

Rookie
Joined
Jan 7, 2018
Messages
38
".. out of the very fountains of themselves."

Hm.. smells like Pharisee.
What?

It was the KJV that was translated from a Pharisaic Bible known as the Mikraot Gedolot, prepared by Jacob ben Chayyim and printed by Daniel Bomberg, who also printed the Babylonian Talmud.
 
Last edited:

elsbet

Superstar
Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
5,122
What?

It was the KJV that was translated from a Pharisaic Bible known as the Mikraot Gedolot, prepared by Jacob ben Chayyim and printed by Daniel Bomberg, who also printed the Babylonian Talmud.
Easy, Trigger.. I liked the post because it was an excellent point. I should probably have employed an emoji or something, after highlighting the comment-- it just struck me as funny.

---> :D
 
Top