Origen was born 185 A.D., in Alexandria; he received a most liberal education, and was initiated at an early age into Hellenic science and art; the principles of Christianity were instilled into his mind by such teachers as Clement of Alexandria.[75] “He says himself that it was an outward motive that first led him to busy himself with the study of Platonic philosophy, and to make himself better acquainted generally with the systems of those who differed from himself. The moving cause was his intercourse with heretics and pagans who had received a philosophical education.”
“Attracted by his great reputation, such persons” came often to him, and he thus defends himself for bestowing his time on the Greek philosophy: “When I had wholly devoted my time to the promulgation of the divine doctrines, and the fame of my skill in them began to be spread abroad, so that both heretics and others, such as had been conversant with the Greek sciences, and particularly men from the philosophical schools, came to visit me, it seemed to me necessary that I should examine the doctrinal opinions of the heretics, and what the philosophers pretended to know of the truth.”[76]
These facts concerning Origen are given because the argument is strikingly similar to that used by many ministers and teachers of the present day, and because it shows how the Platonic philosophy gained such a foothold in so-called Christian schools, and grew into the papacy.
Representatives of three systems
There are three individuals who stand as representatives of three systems of education. Plato personifies heathen philosophy; Christ said of Himself, “I am the ... truth;” Origen personifies the mixture of the two,—truth and error,—and hence stands, from an educational standpoint, as the father of the papacy, which is the mystery of iniquity. It behooves us now to follow carefully the work of this man. After doing so, one can more readily understand why the beast is represented as having several heads.[77]
Faith displaced by speculation
I quote extensively from Mosheim: “The principal doctrines of Christianity were now explained to the people in their native purity and simplicity, without any mixture of abstract reasonings or subtile inventions; nor were the feeble minds of the multitude loaded with a great variety of precepts. But the Christian doctors who had applied themselves to the study of letters and philosophy, soon abandoned the frequented paths, and struck out into the devious wilds of fancy. The Egyptians distinguished themselves in this new method of explaining the truth. They looked upon it as a noble and glorious task to bring the doctrines of celestial wisdom into a certain subjection to the precepts of their philosophy, and to make deep and profound researches into the intimate and hidden nature of those truths which the divine Saviour had delivered to his disciples. Origen was at the head of this speculative tribe. This great man, enchanted by the charms of the Platonic philosophy, set it up as the test of all religion, and imagined, that the reasons of each doctrine were to be found in that favorite philosophy, and their nature and extent to be determined by it. It must be confessed that he handled this matter with modesty and with caution; but he still gave an example to his disciples, the abuse of which could not fail to be pernicious, and under the authority of which, they would naturally indulge themselves without restraint in every wanton fancy. And so, indeed, the case was; for the disciples of Origen, breaking forth from the limits fixed by their master, interpreted, in the most licentious manner, the divine truths of religion according to the tenor of Platonic philosophy. From these teachers the philosophical or scholastic theology derives its origin.”[78]
Beginning of higher criticism
Mosheim says: “Origen unquestionably stands at the head of the interpreters of the Bible in this century. But with pain it must be added, he was first among those who have found in the Scriptures a secure retreat for all errors and idle fancies. As this most ingenious man could see no possible method of vindicating all that is said in the Scriptures against the cavils of the heretics and the enemies of Christianity, provided he interpreted the language of the Bible literally, he concluded that he must expound the sacred volume in the way in which the Platonists were accustomed to explain the history of their gods.”[79]