Yet Another JW Thread

Originally posted by Conrau K
The accusation does fit. Origen clearly distinguishes Christ from the angels. I don't see why you are unable to acknowledge this. It is very clearly expressed. Origen did believe that Christ became an angel (just as Christ became a man) because he believes that all men and angels committed a prenatal sin, the gravity of which determined whethe ...[text shortened]... does not include Christ in the list of angels. But I doubt you will actually read any of this.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I have read it, understood it and assimilated it. It really did take a lot of screaming and shouting from you to eventually spurt it out your eminence, i really hope that it was not too painful for you, now as a recompense, may i honour your holiness by touching your golden robes and kissing your ruby encrusted ring! It may be worthy to note your most illustriousness, that i am not averse to learning 🙂

Origen clearly believes that Christ is God and rejects the idea that Christ was created i.e. like an angel:

For we do not say, as the heretics suppose, that some part of the substance of God was converted into the Son, or that the Son was procreated by the Father out of things non-existent, i.e., beyond His own substance, so that there once was a time when He did not exist; but, putting away all corporeal conceptions, we say that the Word and Wisdom was begotten out of the invisible and incorporeal without any corporeal feeling, as if it were an act of the will proceeding from the understanding. Nor, seeing He is called the Son of (His) love, will it appear absurd if in this way He be called the Son of (His) will. Nay, John also indicates that "God is Light," and Paul also declares that the Son is the splendour of everlasting light. As light, accordingly, could never exist without splendour, so neither can the Son be understood to exist without the Father; for He is called the "express image of His person," and the Word and Wisdom. How, then, can it be asserted that there once was a time when He was not the Son? For that is nothing else than to say that there was once a time when He was not the Truth, nor the Wisdom, nor the Life, although in all these He is judged to be the perfect essence of God the Father; for these things cannot be severed from Him, or even be separated from His essence. And although these qualities are said to be many in understanding, yet in their nature and essence they are one, and in them is the fullness of divinity.

In another work, Against Celsus, he writes

For every prayer, and supplication, and intercession, and thanksgiving, is to be sent up to the Supreme God through the High Priest, who is above all the angels, the living Word and God.

Here is a motley of quotes confirming Origen's trinitarian thought:

"Nothing in the Trinity can be called greater or less, since the fountain of divinity alone contains all things by His word and reason, and by the Spirit of His mouth sanctifies all things which are worthy of sanctification." – De Principis, Book I, ch. 3, section 7.

"Saving baptism was not complete except by the authority of the most excellent Trinity of them all, i.e., by the naming of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit." - De Principis, Book I, ch. 3, section 2.

"The holy Apostles, in preaching the faith of Christ, treated with the utmost clarity of certain matters which they believed to be of absolute necessity to all believers...The specific points which are clearly handed down through the Apostolic preaching [are] these: First, that there is one God who created and arranged all things...Secondly, that Jesus Christ himself was born of the Father before all creatures...Although He was God, He took flesh, and having been made man, He remained what He was, God" – De Principis, Preface, sections 3 – 4.

"For we do not hold that which the heretics imagine: that the Son was procreated by the Father from non-existent substances, that is, from a substance outside Himself, so that there was a time when He did not exist." – De Principis, Book V, Summary, section 28.

"We worship one God, the Father and the Son." – Against Celsus, Book VIII, section 12

Originally posted by Conrau K
Robbie,

You really are just intellectually dishonest. I have consulted many resources on this topic, critical editions, and nothing indicates that Origen believed that Christ was an angel. Only you make that claim. You seem to think yourself endowed with this special revelation so that despite all evidence you know that the quartodecimanism was not abou ...[text shortened]... for Christ to be a principality or domination. But no doubt you are already familiar with this.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
there is nothing dishonest about it, on the contrary, these are the very first time that i had actually read his text, and they simply appeared to me to corroborate what i had previously known. Its no great matter to put Christ and angel into a search engine, is it? The basis of your objections is that of course to admit that Christ was a created en ...[text shortened]... well that is fine, but this slanderous tone is not good and does your reputation no good either.

it of His mouth sanctifies all things which are worthy of sanctification."[/b]

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes it is, for you are not attacking the text nor the reason, but the person, that is slanderous irrespective of your claims of truth. its not my fault that Origen is a trinitarian who states that Christ is also an angelic being and a created entity and a member of the trinity, is it! its your house, you must see to it! i thought you have official ...[text shortened]... onsidered him a heretic, defending heresy now Conrau, wont look good with the Pontifex Maximus😉

Originally posted by Conrau K
Actually, I have gone to great lengths to critically engage with the text. It is only as a result of this that I have concluded you are intellectually dishonest. It is quite clear. I in fact produced a quote in which Origen explicitly rejects the idea that Christ is created. I can't believe that you say that Origen believes Christ to be 'a created entity'. rm of reincarnation. On the Trinity, however, he is generally regarded as totally orthodox.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
well at least we choose to languish in concentration camps rather than take up arms against our fellow humans in support of the Nazis. In fact i dont think the Nazis could have done it without you! Yes honesty and integrity to principles, even in the face of death. I dont think Catholicism should be in a hurry to voice its opinion of others, do you?

Originally posted by Conrau K
I thought we were discussing Origen here. As for concentration camps, the Church suffered far more than the JWs. I think of Bl Titus Brandsma who was regarded as the most dangerous voice against Nazism in all of the Netherlands and was quickly executed. I think of Saint Maximilian Kolbe who begged to be executed instead of the poor father of eight children. ...[text shortened]... xation of Poland.

Yes, Catholics did take arms. In some cases justified, in other cases not.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
we were but you started bitchin, i merely wished to show, that without the popular support of prominent Catholics, the Third Reich would never have achieved its aims and in doing so, to draw a comparison between the actions of Jehovahs witnesses and the actions of the Catholic church. you may sight one or two individuals, but its not a very convinci ...[text shortened]... mind.

http://www.alamoministries.com/content/english/Antichrist/nazigallery/photogallery.html

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
we were but you started bitchin, i merely wished to show, that without the popular support of prominent Catholics, the Third Reich would never have achieved its aims and in doing so, to draw a comparison between the actions of Jehovahs witnesses and the actions of the Catholic church. you may sight one or two individuals, but its not a very convinci ...[text shortened]... ntually won the respect of their cruel Nazis persecutors because of their honesty and integrity.

Originally posted by Conrau K
I am not interested in your biased rubbish. As has already been proven, your sources are rarely, if ever, credible. Some authorities in the Church did support Nazism. They did not however have support from Rome. The Pope explicitly condemned Nazism. Many Catholics died in opposition to Nazism. Bl Titus of Brandsma is one of the more prominent.

How this gels' and unlike the angels 'incapable of sin', you remain in your own little biased world.