The writings of Origen, Vol. 1 (of 2) — Background and Themes
Edition facts
The writings of Origen, Vol. 1 (of 2) — Background and Themes can be approached with a clearer sense of reading commitment from its source measurements: 179,418 words, 13 hr 1 min estimated reading time, and 31 detected text sections.
The text analysis averages about 33.9 words per sentence, while the detected sections provide another way to judge how the source is divided.
Project Gutenberg metadata also associates the work with “Theology -- History -- Early Church, ca. 30-600,” connecting these edition facts with the source record’s subject description.
Calculated from edition completeness, EPUB availability, text structure and catalogue metadata. Not a user rating.
How this score is calculated
- Description quality20 pts
- Title & short description10 pts
- Source metadata20 pts
- Text length15 pts
- Chapters / structure15 pts
- EPUB file integrity20 pts
Total of 100 points, scaled to a 2.5-5.0 range. Editions with an empty description or a missing EPUB file are not scored.
Read the Text
es they find it said, that “our God is a consuming fire;”[19] and in the Gospel according to John, that “God is a Spirit, and they who worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth.”[20] Fire and spirit, according to them, are to be regarded as nothing else than a body. Now, I should like to ask these persons what they have to say respecting that passage where it is declared that God is light; as John writes in his epistle, “God is light, and in Him there is no darkness at all.”[21] Truly He is that light which illuminates the whole understanding of those who are capable of receiving truth, as is said in the thirty-sixth Psalm, “In Thy light we shall see light.”[22] For what other light of God can be named, “in which any one sees light,” save an influence of God, by which a man, being enlightened, either thoroughly sees the truth of all things, or comes to know God Himself, who is called the truth? Such is the meaning of the expression, “In Thy light we shall see light;” _i.e._ in Thy word and wisdom, which is Thy Son, in Himself we shall see Thee the Father. Because He is called light, shall He be supposed to have any resemblance to the light of the sun? Or how should there be the slightest ground for imagining, that from that corporeal light any one could derive the cause of knowledge, and come to the understanding of the truth?
2. If, then, they acquiesce in our assertion, which reason itself has demonstrated, regarding the nature of light, and acknowledge that God cannot be understood to be a body in the sense that light is, similar reasoning will hold true of the expression “a consuming fire.” For what will God consume in respect of His being fire? Shall He be thought to consume material substance, as wood, or hay, or stubble? And what in this view can be called worthy of the glory of God, if He be a fire, consuming materials of that kind? But let us reflect that God does indeed consume and utterly destroy; that He consumes evil thoughts, wicked actions, and sinful desires, when they find their way into the minds of believers; and that, inhabiting along with His Son those souls which are rendered capable of receiving His word and wisdom, according to His own declaration, “I and the Father shall come, and we shall make our abode with him,”[23] He makes them, after all their vices and passions have been consumed, a holy temple, worthy of Himself. Those, moreover, who, on account of the expression “God is a Spirit,” think that He is a body, are to be answered, I think, in the following manner. It is the custom of sacred Scripture, when it wishes to designate anything opposed to this gross and solid body, to call it spirit, as in the expression, “The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life,”[24] where there can be no doubt that by “letter” are meant bodily things, and by “spirit” intellectual things, which we also term “spiritual.” The apostle, moreover, says, “Even unto this day, when Moses is read, the veil is upon their heart: nevertheless, when it shall turn to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.”[25] For so long as any one is not converted to a spiritual understanding, a veil is placed over his heart, with which veil, _i.e._ a gross understanding, Scripture itself is said or thought to be covered: and this is the meaning of the statement that a veil was placed over the countenance of Moses when he spoke to the people, _i.e._ when the law was publicly read aloud. But if we turn to the Lord, where also is the word of God, and where the Holy Spirit reveals spiritual knowledge, then the veil is taken away, and with unveiled face we shall behold the glory of the Lord in the holy Scriptures.
The volume opens with Origen’s De Principiis, a systematic treatise that immediately confronts the reader with a dialectical method: Origen presents opposing views on a question—such as whether the flesh has its own wisdom—then weighs them, leaving the reader to choose. In the excerpt on “carnal wisdom,” he argues that phrases like “the wisdom of the flesh” are catachrestic, not literal, and warns against heretical conclusions that would impugn God’s justice. This pattern of framing a puzzle, citing scripture, and adjudicating between interpretations recurs throughout the work.
A Dialectical Opening
The first book of De Principiis begins with God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit, but the excerpt on “carnal wisdom” shows Origen’s characteristic move: he raises a difficulty—how can a good God create something hostile to Himself?—then reviews how “they” (opponents or fellow inquirers) understand the text. He notes that the phrase “the flesh lusteth against the spirit” is not literal but an “abuse of language,” akin to saying the earth is thirsty. This careful parsing of scriptural language is central to his method. He does not simply assert a position; he stages a debate, then invites the reader to decide. The passage ends with “let the reader choose out of them for himself that which he thinks ought to be preferred,” a direct appeal that makes the reader an active participant.
Scripture as a Field of Argument
Origen’s reasoning is anchored in specific biblical verses. In the excerpt, he cites Romans 8:7 (“the wisdom of the flesh is enmity against God”), Galatians 5:17 (“the flesh lusteth against the spirit”), and Genesis 4:10 (“the voice of thy brother’s blood crieth”). He treats these not as proof texts but as sites of interpretive conflict. For instance, he argues that “the voice of thy brother’s blood” is an improper expression for vengeance, not a literal cry. This approach reveals a key feature of his theology: he insists that scripture must be read with attention to figurative language, lest one attribute hostility to God’s own creation. The reader should watch for how Origen consistently distinguishes between literal and catachrestic uses of terms, a habit that shapes his entire system.
The Question of Time and Creation
In Chapter V of Book III, Origen turns to the world’s beginning in time, a topic he says is “held principally in consequence of our belief in the truth of our sacred history.” He acknowledges that the world was created at a certain time and will be destroyed “on account of its corruption.” This passage, though brief in the excerpt, signals a shift from anthropological to cosmological questions. Origen’s method remains the same: he presents the church’s article of faith, then proposes to “re-discuss a few points.” The reader will find that De Principiis moves fluidly between scriptural exegesis, philosophical reasoning, and doxological reflection. The later books, including the letters and Contra Celsum, extend this method to historical and polemical contexts.
From Treatise to Correspondence
The volume includes two letters: one from Africanus to Origen concerning the History of Susanna, and Origen’s reply. These letters offer a more personal glimpse of Origen’s exegetical practice. The correspondence with Africanus deals with textual authenticity and canonical boundaries, topics that complement the abstract arguments of De Principiis. The letter to Gregory (likely Gregory Thaumaturgus) provides practical guidance on reading scripture. Finally, the first book of Contra Celsum opens Origen’s apologetic work against the Platonic philosopher Celsus. Readers should note how Origen adapts his dialectical style to a direct opponent, using many of the same interpretive strategies seen in the earlier treatise.
First-time readers will benefit from tracking Origen’s habit of posing a question, reviewing multiple interpretations, and then leaving judgment open. The excerpts show a thinker who treats scripture as a living text requiring careful linguistic and theological analysis. Pay attention to his use of “catachrestic” and “improper” language—these terms signal where he is doing his most important work. The volume’s structure, moving from systematic theology to correspondence to polemic, offers a rounded introduction to Origen’s mind.
Reading how Origen lets his questions breathe, waiting patiently in the margins of scripture, I was reminded of evenings spent with an old Victorian minister’s quiet discomfort with easy faith. His measured unease felt familiar, like a door left ajar—never slammed. That same honest hesitancy, the ache of true belief versus comfortable custom, lingers in A Practical View of the Prevailing Religious System of Professed Christians, in the Middle and Higher Classes in this Country, Contrasted with Real Christianity. — Key Ideas to Explore. Both books ask quietly, what do we actually hold?
There are no reviews for this eBook.
Your personal reading reflection
Build a private reading journal entry for this title.