Does this sound UU to you?

SnakUnitarian Universalist Readers

Bliv bruger af LibraryThing, hvis du vil skrive et indlæg

Does this sound UU to you?

Dette emne er markeret som "i hvile"—det seneste indlæg er mere end 90 dage gammel. Du kan vække emnet til live ved at poste et indlæg.

Redigeret: nov 22, 2010, 9:20pm

I found this information on the internet encyclopedia of Philosophy It was written by Edward Moore.
Origen of Alexanderia did not believe in the eternal suffering of sinners in hell. For him, all souls, including the devil himself, will eventually achieve salvation, even if it takes innumerable ages to do so; for Origen believed that God’s love is so powerful as to soften even the hardest heart, and that the human intellect – being the image of God – will never freely choose oblivion over proximity to God, the font of Wisdom Himself. Certain critics of Origen have claimed that this teaching undermines his otherwise firm insistence on free will, for, these critics argue, the souls must maintain the freedom to ultimately reject or accept God, or else free will becomes a mere illusion. What escapes these critics is the fact that Origen’s conception of free will is not our own; he considered freedom in the Platonic sense of the ability to choose the good. Since evil is not the polar opposite of good, but rather simply the absence of good – and thus having no real existence – then to ‘choose’ evil is not to make a conscious decision, but to act in ignorance of the measure of all rational decision, i.e., the good. Origen was unable to conceive of a God who would create souls that were capable of dissolving into the oblivion of evil (non-being) for all eternity. Therefore, he reasoned that a single lifetime is not enough for a soul to achieve salvation, for certain souls require more education or ‘healing’ than others. So he developed his doctrine of multiple ages, in which souls would be re-born, to experience the educative powers of God once again, with a view to ultimate salvation. This doctrine, of course, implies some form of transmigration of souls or metempsychosis. Yet Origen’s version of metempsychosis was not the same as that of the Pythagoreans, for example, who taught that the basest of souls will eventually become incarnated as animals. For Origen, some sort of continuity between the present body, and the body in the age to come, was maintained (Jerome, Epistle to Avitus 7, quoting Origen; see also Commentary on Matthew 11.17). Origen did not, like many of his contemporaries, degrade the body to the status of an unwanted encrustation imprisoning the soul; for him, the body is a necessary principle of limitation, providing each soul with a unique identity. This is an important point for an understanding of Origen’s epistemology, which is based upon the idea that God educates each soul according to its inherent abilities, and that the abilities of each soul will determine the manner of its knowledge. We may say, then, that the uniqueness of the soul’s body is an image of its uniqueness of mind. This is the first inkling of the development of the concept of the person and personality in the history of Western thought.
The restoration of all beings (apokatastasis) is the most important concept in Origen’s philosophy, and the touchstone by which he judges all other theories. His concept of universal restoration is based on equally strong Scriptural and Hellenistic philosophical grounds and is not original, as it can be traced back to Heraclitus, who stated that “the beginning and end are common” (Fragment B 103, tr. J. Barnes 1987, p. 115). Considering that Origen’s later opponents based their charges of heresy largely on this aspect of his teaching, it is surprising to see how well-grounded in scripture this doctrine really is. Origen’s main biblical proof-text is 1 Corinthians 15:25-28, especially verse 28, which speaks of the time “when all things shall be subdued unto him Christ, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all” (KJV, my emphasis). This scriptural notion of God being “all in all” (panta en pasin) is a strong theological support for his theory of apokatastasis. There are, of course, numerous other passages in scripture that contradict this notion, but we must remember that Origen’s strength resided in his philosophical ability to use reason and dialectic in support of humane doctrines, not in the ability to use scripture in support of dogmatical and anti-humanistic arguments. Origen imagined salvation not in terms of the saved rejoicing in heaven and the damned suffering in hell, but as a reunion of all souls with God.

nov 22, 2010, 9:14pm

Denne meddelelse er blevet slettet af dens forfatter.

nov 22, 2010, 10:21pm

No, but on the grounds that we, through a free and responsible search, find the truth independently.

Universalism might have accepted this particular take, but the universalists back before the merger were not likely to have been reared in an environment that allowed for reincarnation or the like. Origen did, however, posit a universalism and a means to it that those of us who believe in that kind of nature could accept congruent with our view of the universe, the interconnected web of all being, and the like.

I don't see how we can connect this to Unitarianism. I would welcome somebody's competent lead in that direction.

Origen was an admirable freak. He castrated himself so that he could be useful in counsel to women, so that he could provide counsel without being distracted by lust.

I wish more people in Unitarian Universalism would consider questions like yours, and I thank you for bringing Origen up.


aug 27, 2011, 1:52am

Of course, Origen did not actually self-castrate. This was a claim he made to an irate husband who expressed hostility over the devotion his wife clearly had toward Origen. They were caught "counseling" pretty closely. What would you do?

jul 5, 2013, 12:34pm

Some of us take the modest position that all persons of moral courage who live loving reason and feeling love re Unitarian Universalists. No other "doctrine" is more tolerant of diverse views or more militant against the great fraud of intolerance. No other "belief" system has the understanding that the plurality and diversity of the universe is in fact what unites, and makes, the whole.

Some of us accept with gratitude the contributions of Origen to the universe of the accepting church. What other congregation could there be? For Origen, or for anyone, any person, anyone alive or dead. Anyone.