[Steven Avery]

Hi Folks,

It may be proper to mention that the report of Origen and sexual self-mutilation is from 100 years later (Eusebius about 325 AD and then Jerome around 400 AD). Afaik it has no direct confirmation in his writings (he did write a Commentary on Matthew) or other writings of his times and thus some scholar/historians question its accuracy, conjecturing it could have been a story spread or embellished by his opponents.

The story may well be true, and it is hard to get the full details on the net (there is a reference to a German paper that probably has the various references and non-references) however I think it is only proper to point out that there is some uncertainty, ie. unless someone has some strong indicators from the time of Origen.

=====

On the general issue:

As false as many of his doctrines are I think there is a tendency to overpaint his darkness, even at times by Dean John Burgon and maybe Peter Ruckman. To try and make him the source of virtually all error and Bible textual corruption. There are some Bible verse issues (e.g. geographical verses - including the correct names Gergesenes and Bethabara beyond the Jordan) where Origen is actually quite significant historically on the true and accurate side. Maybe only a couple, a few. However the idea that he grossly tampered with the text personally (rather than bumbling alexandrian and gnostic scribes generally mucking up the text unto the abject corruption of Vaticanus and Sinaiticus) is one I have not seen demonstrated. With his proper understanding and explanations on some verses being at least a mitigation towards a level, a measure, of Bible text sincerity.

Shalom,
Steven