I. Adopted Heathen Transmigration Fallacy

1. DISCARDS GOD’S SOLUTION TO SIN PROBLEM

According to translator Frederick Crombie, four fundamental errors forced Origen to spiritualize away Biblical truth. These errors were: (1) The pre-existence of all human souls, and their imprisonment in material bodies as punishment for sins previously committed; (2) the pre-existence of even the “human soul of Christ,” (3) the transformation of our material bodies into “absolutely ethereal ones at the resurrection,” and (4) the ultimate salvation of “all men, and even devils,” “restored through the mediation of Christ.” ^{11) Frederick Crombie, quoted in “Introductory Note to the Works of Origen,” in ANF, vol. 4, p. 233. Dr. Crombie, the translator and annotator, was professor of Biblical criticism, St. Mary’s College, St. Andrews.} Clinging to such basic fallacies in his concept of the plan and provisions of redemption, Origen could not do other than discard the Advent hope as the goal of the ages. That was the basis.CFF1 1012.2

2. TAUGHT SUCCESSIVE TRANSMIGRATIONS OF THE SOUL

Note Crombie’s first point. Origen definitely taught a succession of transmigrations of the human soul through a sequence of existences prior to and following the present life, with condemnation and bodily imprisonment imposed to atone for the sins of a previous existence—and with one’s status in the next world determined by his conduct in this life. This was vital to his theory of the immortality of the soul and its restoration. Although Origen disavowed the type of transmigration, or metempsychosis, held by certain heretics, he nevertheless personally taught actual transmigration. Thus:CFF1 1013.1

“The soul, which is immaterial and invisible in its nature, exists in no material place, without having a body suited to the nature of that place. Accordingly, it at one time puts off one body which was necessary before, but which is no longer adequate in its changed state, and it exchanges it for a second; and at another time it assumes [still] another in addition to the former, which is needed as a better covering, suited to the purer ethereal regions of heaven.” ^{22) Origen, Against Celsus, book 7, chap. 32, p 623.}CFF1 1013.2

He even went so far as to assert: “Angels may become men or demons, and again from the latter they may rise to be men or angels.” ^{33) Origen, “Fragment,” from “Epistle to Avitus,” translated by Jerome and appended to book 1 of De Principiis, p. 267.} That is the second point.CFF1 1013.3

Origen reasoned, by way of “hypothesis,” that if the same soul could be “twice [incarnated] in the body,” then “why should it not be thrice, and repeatedly in it.” ^{44) Origen, Commentary on Matthew, book 13, sec, 1, in ANF, vol. 9, p. 474.} Then he observes, “Punishments” for the sins of this life are “rendered” by the “method of transmigration.” And finally follows this astonishing assertion:CFF1 1013.4

“But if this be granted as a consequence, perhaps there will never be a time when a soul shall not undergo transmigration; for always because of its former sins will it dwell in the body.” ^{55) Ibid.}CFF1 1013.5

Then he explains that only the “absolutely sinless” need “no transmigration.” And later in the same chapter he concludes, “There will be two general forms of punishment, the one by way of transmigration, and the other outside of a body of this kind.” ^{66) Ibid., pp 474, 475.} That is boldly clear.CFF1 1014.1

Origen’s strange vagaries even included the following:CFF1 1014.2

“It would surely be absurd to say that He [Christ] tasted death for human sins and not for any other beings besides man which had fallen into sin, as for example the stars. For not even the stars are clean in the eyes of God.” ^{77) Origen, Commentary on the Gospel of John, book 1, sec 4, in ANF, Vol. 9, p. 319.}CFF1 1014.3

And again, “For the soul of the sun is placed in a body.” ^{88) Ibid., sec. 17, p. 306.} Such are the lengths to which he went.CFF1 1014.4

3. BIBLICAL TERMS EXPLAINED AWAY BY ALLEGORIZING

Next, note Crombie’s fourth point. Origen simply added to Plato’s teaching to make restoration universal by eliminating Plato’s few “incurables,” showing that they were not really incurable. So pagan philosophy furnished the original restorationist idea to Origen. But now, as a Christian teacher, he must adapt and enforce it in the language of Scripture. Plato had taught that souls in the purgative fires did not perish, for they were immortal. And to avoid the obvious intent of the scriptural expressions of “die,” “perish,” “destroy,” et cetera, Origen explained them away by drafting upon a secondary meaning used in the language of poetry, exaggeration, hyperbole, and so forth. ^{99) Origen, De Principiis, book 1, chap. 3, sec. 3, p. 252; Preface to De Principiis, par. 8, p. 241.} Thus “death” was made to mean life; “life” to mean happiness; and to be “destroyed,” to be made miserable. So he reasoned.CFF1 1014.5

Origen experienced no difficulty in this, for he maintained that Scripture has a “spiritual,” as well as a literal, meaning, which fact “escapes the notice of most.” ^{1010) Origen, Preface to De Principiis, par. 8, in ANF, Vol. 4, p. 241; De Principiis, book 2, chap. 10, sec, 6, p. 295.} That is the magic key. By this device he could assign any meaning he chose to Scripture—but, as Mosheim puts it, “always at the expense of truth.” ^{1111) Quoted in Constable, Duration and Nature of Future Punishment, p. 224.} So the scriptural warnings to the sinner that he should die in person were neutralized by Origen’s directing their action against the sinner’s sin. But in doing so Origen perverted the intent of Scripture as verily as did Tertullian.CFF1 1014.6

The object of hell-fire, Origen held, is to destroy wickedness. Iniquity becomes the fuel of Hell. “The fury of God’s vengeance,” he taught, is for the “purgation of souls.” It is “applied by fire” with the “object of healing.” ^{1212) Origen, De Principiis, book 2, chap. 10, sec. 6, in ANF, Vol. 4, p. 296.} Till this evil is burned out and eradicated Hell burns on. This process which destroys evil is that of “purgation” of the evildoer who, in the process, grows into the likeness of God, which likeness had been defaced. When the process is completed he takes his place in glory.CFF1 1015.1