4 Matching Annotations
  1. Mar 2020
    1. Therefore let the 201 desire of possession take hold of no one, for what gain is it to acquire these things which we cannot take with us? Why not rather get those things which we can take away with us--to wit, prudence, justice, temperance, courage, understanding, love, kindness to the poor, faith in Christ, freedom from wrath, hospitality? If we possess these, we shall find them of themselves preparing for us a welcome there in the land of the meek-hearted.

      This makes me think of Origen's anthropology of how humans should try to be active (like God, incorporeal) rather than passive (materialistic, corporeal) because he said that the more materialistic you are, the more distracted from God you become.

    1. Now, in the same way in which we have understood that Wisdom was the beginning of the ways of God, and is said to be created, forming beforehand and containing within herself the species and beginnings of all creatures, must we understand her to be the Word of God, because of her disclosing to all other beings

      Although simple and something that should not come as a surprise to most who are familiar with any kind of Christian religion, this is not only another good example of Origen's system of interpretation but also a good summary to how Wisdom, or Jesus must be understood as the Word of God.

    2. is a statement not made by us only; although it may seem a sufficiently marvellous and incredible assertion to those who have a reputation as philosophers among Greeks and Barbarians, by some of whom, however, an idea of His existence seems to have been entertained, in their acknowledging that all things were created by the word or reason of God.

      I am not sure I understand perfectly what was said here, however, if what I believe it is being said is right I think this is a very interesting sentence. Son of God is a statement made by us, which is sufficient by itself but also by greek philosophers? As a reinforcement of this statement?

    3. Having refuted, then, as well as we could, every notion which might suggest that we were to think of God as in any degree corporeal, we go on to say that, according to strict truth, God is incomprehensible, and incapable of being measured.

      I thought this was a good example of Origen's systematic approach to interpret scriptures. The 4 points before, he introduced us to the idea of God and slowly built arguments to finally state human's incapability measuring God, or in better words, God himself being incapable of being measured.