What do you think?
Rate this book
Journey Back to God: Origen on the Problem of Evil
Journey Back to God explores Origen of Alexandria's creative, complex, and controversial treatment of the problem of evil. It argues that his layered cosmology functions as a theodicy that deciphers deeper meaning beneath cosmic disparity. Origen why does God create a world where some suffer more than others? On the surface, the unfair arrangement of the world defies theological coherence. In order to defend divine justice against the charge of cosmic mismanagement, Origen develops a theological cosmology that explains the ontological status and origin of evil as well as its cosmic implications. Origen's theodicy hinges on the journey of the soul back to God. Its themes correlate with the soul's creation, fall and descent into materiality, gradual purification, and eventual divinization. The world, for Origen, functions as a school and hospital for the soul where it undergoes the necessary education and purgation. Origen carefully calibrates his cosmology and theology. He
portrays God as a compassionate and judicious teacher, physician, and father who employs suffering for our amelioration.
Journey Back to God frames the systematic study of Origen's theodicy within a broader theory of theodicy as navigation, which signifies the dynamic process whereby we impute meaning to suffering. It unites the logical and spiritual facets of his theodicy, and situates it in its third-century historical, theological, and philosophical context, correcting the distortions that continue to plague Origen scholarship. Furthermore, the study clarifies his ambiguous position on universalism within the context of his eschatology. Finally, it assesses the cogency and contemporary relevance of Origen's theodicy, highlighting the problems and prospects of his bold, constructive, and optimistic vision.
portrays God as a compassionate and judicious teacher, physician, and father who employs suffering for our amelioration.
Journey Back to God frames the systematic study of Origen's theodicy within a broader theory of theodicy as navigation, which signifies the dynamic process whereby we impute meaning to suffering. It unites the logical and spiritual facets of his theodicy, and situates it in its third-century historical, theological, and philosophical context, correcting the distortions that continue to plague Origen scholarship. Furthermore, the study clarifies his ambiguous position on universalism within the context of his eschatology. Finally, it assesses the cogency and contemporary relevance of Origen's theodicy, highlighting the problems and prospects of his bold, constructive, and optimistic vision.
- GenresTheology
256 pages, Hardcover
First published April 5, 2012
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
June 29, 2013
This is an excellent book. Scott is not trying to side with the revisionist reading of Origen nor the traditional condemnation of Origen. Throughout the book Scott is trying to look at what Origen is saying and let the pieces fall where they may. He considers Origen's works from the perspective of theodicy.
Origen's theodicy is uncovered to be a narrative where God creates souls whose fall into sin necessitates a material world. The material world, far from being evil, serves to bring the descent into sin and evil to a stop and to facilitate a "journey back to God." God providentially arranges the world in such a way that all fallen creatures will be be restored to the (bodiless) union with God from which it started. Though Scott is aware of Origen scholarship which reads "preexistence language" in Origen as a way of speaking about providence and foreknowledge (Harl, Behr, Edwards) he rejects such a reading because preexistence is a function of Origen's christology and a necessary step in Origen's attempt to distance God from the origin of evil. Scott also rejects the idea that Origen did not teach universal salvation. In fact, as Scott sees it, universalism is an essential and logically fitting part of Origen's theodicy. The question of the possibility of the fall happening all over again is also addressed and answered in the negative. Scott believes that Origen understood the experience souls have gained from the fall and restoration has changed them and will make it impossible for them to fall again.
Origen's theodicy is presented as a journey because to Origen, as Scott points out, it allows Origen to present his theodicy as a practical pastoral tool. God is a healer and director of souls. The entire world is pastorally arranged to facilitate each soul on its journey back to God. This understanding informs Origen's practice as a director and pastor himself. Theodicy is not a abstract pass-time but it is a tool in understanding why we are where we are and how we can return to union with God.
In conclusion Scott thinks that the general outline of Origen's theodicy such as its practical intent, its focus on God as director and healer are relevant even today. Other elements are less successful. Scott does not believe Origen has succesfully argued that God is distant from the origins of evil, because even though God did not create evil, Origen must admit that God created the conditions within which evil could arise. He also thinks that in some respects Origen's investigative and tentative theological speculations (preexistence among them) are not relevant or helpful for us today.
My assessment is that Scott has done a lot of very good and impressive work here. Though I disagree with him on several counts. First: I think he does not sufficiently answer the objections raised to the idea that Origen taught a fall from dis-embodied preexistence into an embodied state. To Origen, as Scott acknowledges, the ONLY being capable of existing without any form of embodiment is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. A state where creatures are completely without any form of body is impossible in Origen's logic. The "anterior causes" Origen mentions with regard to the embodiment of creatures can only be interpreted as foreknowledge and providence if Origen is read in such a way as to be consistent with himself. Second: Scott does not sufficiently engage the fact that the ONLY location in ALL of Origen's writings where he unambiguously teaches a fall in sin and a subsequent fall into a material body from a preexistent disembodied state (as Edwards points out), is in fragment 15 of "On First Principles." Said fragment is NOT original to Origen but is a composition created by Paul Koetschau in (very) recent times from several sources and most of them hostile to Origen. Fragment 15 presumes the doctrine it is composed to teach without any evidence to support it from Origen's own writings. That is a fundamental weakness in the traditional interpretation of Origen. Third: the presumed doctrine of the fall from preexistence logically requires that those who have fallen the deepest will the most engrossed in matter. To Origen, however, those who have fallen the deepest are the devils and demons whose bodies are much less engrossed in matter compared to ours. This means that a sinful fall from preexistence into bodies logically contradicts Origen's known doctrine on the effects of the fall. Fourth: the language of fall and descent does not necessarily imply a sinful fall from preexistence into bodies. St. Athanasius of Alexandria uses such language again and again in his "Against the Heathen" and no-one (that I know off) has ever thought of reading such a doctrine of preexistence and fall into Athanasius. It is not clear to me why we should force such a reading onto Origen's corpus.
"The Journey back to God" is a remarkable reflection and an in depth reading of Origen's corpus and provides readers a very important insight into Origen's pastoral mind and the parameters of his theology. After reading it you will have been equipped with some foundational tools in your own reflections concerning theodicy and for your pastoral practice. You will also have gained an excellent perspective to start reading and interpreting Origen's works for yourself.
Gregory +
Origen's theodicy is uncovered to be a narrative where God creates souls whose fall into sin necessitates a material world. The material world, far from being evil, serves to bring the descent into sin and evil to a stop and to facilitate a "journey back to God." God providentially arranges the world in such a way that all fallen creatures will be be restored to the (bodiless) union with God from which it started. Though Scott is aware of Origen scholarship which reads "preexistence language" in Origen as a way of speaking about providence and foreknowledge (Harl, Behr, Edwards) he rejects such a reading because preexistence is a function of Origen's christology and a necessary step in Origen's attempt to distance God from the origin of evil. Scott also rejects the idea that Origen did not teach universal salvation. In fact, as Scott sees it, universalism is an essential and logically fitting part of Origen's theodicy. The question of the possibility of the fall happening all over again is also addressed and answered in the negative. Scott believes that Origen understood the experience souls have gained from the fall and restoration has changed them and will make it impossible for them to fall again.
Origen's theodicy is presented as a journey because to Origen, as Scott points out, it allows Origen to present his theodicy as a practical pastoral tool. God is a healer and director of souls. The entire world is pastorally arranged to facilitate each soul on its journey back to God. This understanding informs Origen's practice as a director and pastor himself. Theodicy is not a abstract pass-time but it is a tool in understanding why we are where we are and how we can return to union with God.
In conclusion Scott thinks that the general outline of Origen's theodicy such as its practical intent, its focus on God as director and healer are relevant even today. Other elements are less successful. Scott does not believe Origen has succesfully argued that God is distant from the origins of evil, because even though God did not create evil, Origen must admit that God created the conditions within which evil could arise. He also thinks that in some respects Origen's investigative and tentative theological speculations (preexistence among them) are not relevant or helpful for us today.
My assessment is that Scott has done a lot of very good and impressive work here. Though I disagree with him on several counts. First: I think he does not sufficiently answer the objections raised to the idea that Origen taught a fall from dis-embodied preexistence into an embodied state. To Origen, as Scott acknowledges, the ONLY being capable of existing without any form of embodiment is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. A state where creatures are completely without any form of body is impossible in Origen's logic. The "anterior causes" Origen mentions with regard to the embodiment of creatures can only be interpreted as foreknowledge and providence if Origen is read in such a way as to be consistent with himself. Second: Scott does not sufficiently engage the fact that the ONLY location in ALL of Origen's writings where he unambiguously teaches a fall in sin and a subsequent fall into a material body from a preexistent disembodied state (as Edwards points out), is in fragment 15 of "On First Principles." Said fragment is NOT original to Origen but is a composition created by Paul Koetschau in (very) recent times from several sources and most of them hostile to Origen. Fragment 15 presumes the doctrine it is composed to teach without any evidence to support it from Origen's own writings. That is a fundamental weakness in the traditional interpretation of Origen. Third: the presumed doctrine of the fall from preexistence logically requires that those who have fallen the deepest will the most engrossed in matter. To Origen, however, those who have fallen the deepest are the devils and demons whose bodies are much less engrossed in matter compared to ours. This means that a sinful fall from preexistence into bodies logically contradicts Origen's known doctrine on the effects of the fall. Fourth: the language of fall and descent does not necessarily imply a sinful fall from preexistence into bodies. St. Athanasius of Alexandria uses such language again and again in his "Against the Heathen" and no-one (that I know off) has ever thought of reading such a doctrine of preexistence and fall into Athanasius. It is not clear to me why we should force such a reading onto Origen's corpus.
"The Journey back to God" is a remarkable reflection and an in depth reading of Origen's corpus and provides readers a very important insight into Origen's pastoral mind and the parameters of his theology. After reading it you will have been equipped with some foundational tools in your own reflections concerning theodicy and for your pastoral practice. You will also have gained an excellent perspective to start reading and interpreting Origen's works for yourself.
Gregory +
Displaying 1 of 1 review