The Trinity: Genesis of a doctrine
- Thread starter Thomas
- Start date
Don't be silly: I haven't bought them up as evidence that Christians roast in hell.I didn't say that he is an Arian
..and no, I haven't read his books .. have you?
Last edited:
The point was to avoid people making erroneous assumptions.
Fair enough .. overall I would agree with you, too.
No, that's informed commentary in the face of your un-informed comments.
Impossible to say. Of Lucian we can't frame a definite theology; of Origen, only a fraction of his prodigious output is available to us, some of it orthodox, some heterodox. Arius himself claims no authority other than his own, and although his ideas were not entirely original, it's no easy task to determine his theological influences.
I go with Kelly, whatever his Biblical background, his framework is determined by Middle Platonism, and that is his flaw.
LOL, have you ever attended a lecture on Origen's theology?
We know more than you suppose ...
OK, then please try and rein in the exaggerations in future ...
.so we can't be sure either way..
..so you claim. Perhaps you can show me why that is categorically true?
We need to know what Origen truly believed, I would of thought.
We know what Alexander believed, because we have the Nicene creed
LOL, have you ever attended a lecture on Origen's theology?
Truth mixed with falsehood is always confusing..
The full text of Origen's De principiis (On first principals) survives only in Rufinus' translation.
Last edited:
Does it matter?
Well as you won't believe any of the sources, despite what scholarship might say, no.
Why?
Which is why I offer correction.
Of course it matters. We know that Arius was following a well-established school (didaskaleion) that was closed during the
Diocletianic persecution. We need to know what that school was teaching.
Me: We need to know what Origen truly believed, I would of thought.
Thomas: Why?
..so we know what deviations (if any) Arius was actually propagating.
Do we? Where'd you get that?
Well, according to that thesis I cited ---> Antonio Orbe, "Alexander and Arius of Alexandria"
Antonio Orbe is apparently a Jesuit specializing in Patristics
https://es.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Orbe
In approximately A.D. 389 Alexandria’s library (Serapeum) was burned down at the order of Roman Emperor Theodosius.
In the 6th. century, Emperor Justinian ordered for all of Origen's writings to be burned.
These Nicene Emperors .. they didn't seem to like their Christian ancestors' views.
I wonder why the Arian Emperors didn't go round burning books?
In the 6th. century, Emperor Justinian ordered for all of Origen's writings to be burned.
These Nicene Emperors .. they didn't seem to like their Christian ancestors' views.
I wonder why the Arian Emperors didn't go round burning books?
Last edited:
OK, let's first agree the ground.
The root question:
@Muhammed_isa: Was Arius a distinguished scholar of Lucian & Origen or not?
@Thomas: Impossible to say, because we can't reconstruct the theologies of Arius, Lucian or Origen to your satisfaction.
Do you agree?
@Muhammed_isa: ..so we know what deviations (if any) Arius was actually propagating.
@Thomas: But you say we cannot reliably reconstruct Arius' theology.
Do you agree?
For the benefit of others:
It's unlikely Arius actually attended the school at Alexandria, but he lived and worked there, and would have been well aware of Alexandrian exegetical methodology. However, he claims his tutor was Lucian, who might well have been the first head of the School of Antioch, and the two schools adopted very different approaches, what bearing that might have on Arius' Alexandrianism is hard to determine ...
Origen would certainly have been an influential figure in Arius' time, but Arius does not accept Origen's idea of the eternal generation of the Son, so we can assume Arius opposed Origen on that issue. Nor does Arius argue from any authority – he mentions some names with whom he associates as Subordinationists, and he mentions others, for example Emanationists, whom he repudiates as heretics, as did the orthodox church.
According to Ilaria L.E. Ramelli, (Professor of Theology and endowed Chair at the Angelicum, Rome, Humboldt Fellow at Erfurt University, Fellow of the Royal Historical Society, Honorary Professor at Durham University, Senior Member at the Cambridge Centre for the Study of Platonism, Senior Research Fellow at Durham, Oxford and Princeton universities!) –
Origen was a primary source of inspiration for the Three Cappadocians, as they were called, Basil the Great (330–379) bishop of Caesarea; his younger brother Gregory of Nyssa (c.335–c.395) bishop of Nyssa and a close friend, Gregory of Nazianzus (329–389) Patriarch of Constantinople (Cappadocia is a region in Turkey), who became the champions of Trinitarian orthodoxy.
Origen inspired Marcellus, who was anti-Arian, and notably Athanasius, so it's hard to place him as any way an inspiration for Arius, and he definitely would have opposed Arius insistence on the idea that 'there was a time when he was not'. Traditionally Origen is said to have been a subordinationist, but that is now under review by later scholars, to place his views in the context of his time and general theological development.
"to my satisfaction"?
..either we can or we can't know whether he was a distinguished scholar of Origen.
I would say that we cannot determine what Arius was following, unless we know for sure what Origen
believed.
No, I did not say we do not know anything about what Arius believed.
You asked me why we need to know what Origen believed (with accuracy).
I'm saying that we need to know (what Origen believed with accuracy), in order to know
if Arian's beliefs DEVIATE from Origen's, in actual reality!
..OK?
..well good luck with that.
Unless we have got original, radiocarbon-dated manuscripts that we can determine beyond
reasonable doubt are authored by him, it is pure speculation imo.
Last edited:
What's your opinion?
I think that it's likely that he was.
I think it's likely that Origen was a subordinationist.
Can I prove it? No.
Can you prove that he wasn't?
Correct .. because the Nicene Christians wanted to "blot-out" or corrupt his theological writings.
OK.
So in your opinion, we cannot know the theology of Origen.
Nor, I assume you would say, can we know for sure the theology of Arius' tutor, Lucian of Antioch?