Schlesinger, Dan R. (2016) Did Origen teach reincarnation? A response to neo-Gnostic theories of Christian reincarnation with particular reference to Origen and to the Second Council of Constantinople (553). MPhil(R) thesis http://theses.gla.ac.uk/7845/ Copyright and moral rights for this thesis are retained by the author A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the Author The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the Author When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given Glasgow Theses Service http://theses.gla.ac.uk/ [email protected] DID ORIGEN TEACH REINCARNATION? A RESPONSE TO NEO-GNOSTIC THEORIES OF CHRISTIAN REINCARNATION WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO ORIGEN AND TO THE SECOND COUNCIL OF CONSTANTINOPLE (553) by DAN R. SCHLESINGER A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF THEOLOGY & RELIGIOUS STUDIES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW IN FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF THEOLOGY (RESEARCH) SEPTEMBER 2016 2 ABSTRACT Modern proponents of ancient Gnosticism claim that Jesus Christ, the Apostles, and the early Church fathers embraced reincarnation. However, their attempts to associate reincarnation with early Christianity belie their metaphysical bias, which is the basis of their historical revisionism. Because their hermeneutics are flawed, the neo-Gnostic interpretation of Scripture differs significantly from traditional Christian interpretations. In order to justify their doctrines of karma and reincarnation, neo-Gnostics revise Church history so that it reflects their metaphysical worldview. Their attempt to revise church history, creates the illusion that the Bible teaches reincarnation. However, neither the Old or New Testaments teaches reincarnation, which is why the neo-Gnostic preconceptions are baseless. The neo-Gnostic claim that the early fathers embraced reincarnation is also false. Indeed, the overwhelming evidence indicates that they repudiated reincarnation. Moreover, the neo-Gnostic assumption that Origen embraced transmigration because he assimilated Neo-Platonic ideas, is baseless. While he investigated the subject of transmigration, he rejected it because it was not compatible with Christian belief. The facts surrounding the Fifth General Council (553) contradict the neo-Gnostic notion that clerics excised reincarnation from the Bible. Rather, the council issued anathemas against the Origenist’ and their hyper-Origen views, and not against Origen. The weight of scholarly opinion supports this contention. Moreover, the development and final canonization of the New Testament by the fourth century precludes the possibility that reincarnation was a biblical doctrine in the sixth century. Manuscripts dating from the second through sixth century bear this out. The neo-Gnostics argue that Origen’s writings prove the he embraced transmigration of souls. However, while some passages seem to suggest that he embraced it, a closer examination of them indicate that he did not. Indeed, most scholars agree that reliable translations of Origen demonstrate that he rejected transmigration. Moreover, Origen’s response to Celsus’ attack against Christian belief, leaves no doubt that he rejected transmigration of souls. Finally, the concepts of karma and reincarnation are fundamentally opposed to Christianity. Not only are they theologically and etymologically unrelated, they are inherently contradictory. Indeed, neither the Bible, the Rule of Faith, or Christian creeds or confession, mentions reincarnation! The neo-Gnostic claim that the early Christian’s embraced reincarnation until its excision from the Bible in 553, is therefore, false. 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................4 Statement of the Problem…………..............……........................6 Issues and Remedy.........................................................................7 Method and Form of Thesis…............................................…......9 1. The Neo-Gnostic Case for “Christian Reincarnationism”..............................25 2. Reincarnation, Source Testimony, and Modern Debate….….........................59 3. Origen and the Culture of His Time………....……………..................…........71 4. Origen Texts, Translations, and Reliability......................................................92 5. Origen’s Notion of Salvation & the Afterlife…..............................................126 6. Origen, Transmigration, and the Fifth General Council..............................139 CONCLUSION……….........................................................................……..........159 APPENDIX A. PROPOSITIONS AGAINST REINCARNATION………….........…......166 B. THE ANATHAMAS AGAINST ORIGEN …………….…......................167 C. INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCES on ORIGEN STUDIES.............168 D. THE CHURCH FATHERS on REINCARNATION................................169 BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………….............….....…........173 4 Introduction The Winds of Change Until recently, Judaeo-Christianity was the dominating cultural influence in America. However, with the emergence of Eastern-based religion around the turn of the century, the spiritual landscape began to change.1 By the early 1960’s and well into the 1980’s, the spiritual pendulum shifted dramatically towards an interest in a religious philosophy that blended Eastern and Western based ideas best represented by the so-called New Age Movement. While this cultural phenomenon is not a movement in a unified social sense, it does encompass several unifying religious and philosophical ideas. Most researchers agree that this new spirituality represents a “…set of cosmological ideas and spiritual practices.”2 That is, followers typically embrace elements of Hinduism, Tibetan Buddhism, Taoism, and other strains of Eastern thought. However, as widespread as this movement is and as spiritually evolved, as it may appear, it is not new as it represents varieties of ancient Gnosticism.3 Indeed, aspects of this syncretistic ideology (hereafter, neo-Gnosticism) are evident in a several new- age religions today including Unity, Theosophy, Rosicrucianism, and in Rudolf Steiner’s Anthroposophical Society. Scholars differ whether neo-Paganism should be included in this mix of religions. 4 To a much lesser extent, shades of neo-Gnosticism are present in the Word-Faith movement.5 Historical Revisionism All neo-Gnostics embrace the teaching of reincarnation or transmigration of souls. While in my view this doctrine has never been considered compatible with Christian doctrine, neo-Gnostic writers assert that early Christians embraced reincarnation until clerics removed it from the Bible at the Fifth General Council (c. 553). They also allege that Jesus Christ, the Apostles, and the early Church fathers 1 The World’s Parliament of Religions held in Chicago in 1893 introduced Eastern-based religion to America. For details, see David J. Bertuca, Donald K. Hartman, and Susan M. Neumeister, The World’s Columbian Exposition: a Centennial Bibliographic Guide (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1996). 2 Ted Peters, The Cosmic Self: a Penetrating Look at Today’s New Age Movements (New York: Harper Collins Publishers, 1991), 4. 3 Peter Jones, The Gnostic Empire Strikes Back (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1992. 4 Daren Kemp, New Age: A Guide (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2004), 8-10. 5 D.R. McConnell, A Different Gospel: Biblical and Historical Insights into the Word of Faith Movement (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, Updated Sub edition, 1995). 5 embraced reincarnation. While our study will investigate whether Christ and the Apostles taught reincarnation, it will not be exhaustive, as others have already accomplished this.6 Our aim, rather, is to examine whether the early fathers (particularly Origen) embraced it and whether clerics excised it from the Bible, in 553. However, refuting these allegations will not discourage neo-Gnostics from revising Church history, as their intent is to legitimize reincarnation with Christianity even if it means that they manipulate the facts. Regardless, an examination of their arguments is necessary because it will expose their philosophical and theological bias. Moreover, ignoring their revisionism allows the lines of distinction that define Eastern and Western-based religion to become so blurred that one will hardly recognize either. The neo-Gnostic claim that early Christians embraced reincarnation suggests that the beliefs of these early Christians differed substantially from Christian belief today. This implies that no doctrinal continuity exists between early and modern Christianity. However, we will argue that the absence of reincarnation in Christianity today, is proof of its implicit rejection by the early Christians and not a result of its having been removed from the Bible in the sixth century. Let us assume that the early Christians embraced reincarnation and that the neo-Gnostics are correct. This would mean that basic Christian doctrine today needs radical revision. The traditional meaning and significance of the birth, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ would need to correspond essentially to