Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

In his Ecclesiastical History, Socrates Scholasticus touches on the defense made by Pamphilus and Eusebius in favor of Origen's teachings, highlighting their efforts to clear Origen of accusations regarding his doctrines. He emphasizes that these two figures jointly wrote an Apology for Origen, aiming to prove that Origen wasn’t introducing novel teachings but rather expounding on the mystical traditions already embedded in the Church’s understanding. Socrates notes that Pamphilus and Eusebius showed how Origen's view that Christ possessed a human soul was consistent with the beliefs of earlier church fathers.

In summarizing their work, Socrates asserts that the tradition of attributing a soul to Christ was not an innovation by Origen. Instead, Origen was "the mere expositor of the mystical tradition of the church." Socrates's account serves as a reminder of how Pamphilus and Eusebius's defense portrayed Origen not as a heretic but as someone deeply rooted in the established theological tradition of the Church, reaffirming the idea that Christ’s soul played a pivotal role in his incarnation and divine mission.

When examining the beliefs about Jesus’s soul through the lenses of Origen and Carpocrates as if they spoke of one and the same figure, a different picture emerges—one not bound by the orthodox-hyperbolic dichotomy imposed by Irenaeus. In this unified portrayal, we find a person who perceived the soul of Jesus as an essential intermediary between the divine and the human, capable of transcending the limitations imposed by the material world.

This figure, let’s call him Origen-Carpocrates, maintained that Jesus possessed a human soul, which, through purity and steadfastness, ascended to a higher understanding of divine mysteries. Much like Origen’s interpretation, this soul was the vessel through which divine wisdom manifested itself within the incarnate Christ. It allowed him to endure human emotions and experiences, bridging the gap between the divine Logos and the material realm. The soul’s journey and enlightenment weren’t simply a theological abstraction; they were practical, demonstrating the soul's potential to rise beyond earthly constraints and encounter the divine directly.

Yet, in this same figure, we also find the boldness that Carpocrates is said to have displayed—the claim that this divine-human realization could be attained by others. Origen-Carpocrates understood that Jesus, through his soul's purity, remembered the divine truths from which it had originated, suggesting that any soul, steadfast and pure, might similarly ascend. This wasn't an act of diminishing Christ but rather an extension of his mission, demonstrating that the pathway to the divine was not exclusive but open to all who could shed the chains of worldly ignorance.

Far from the audacious pride Irenaeus attributes to Carpocrates, this individual advocated for a shared human potential to emulate Christ’s journey. For Origen-Carpocrates, Jesus was the exemplar—not an isolated miracle but the prototype of what humanity could achieve. His teachings thus bridged the orthodoxy of Origen with the transcendental aspirations attributed to Carpocrates, forming a singular vision where the soul's journey to divine wisdom wasn’t limited to one historical figure but was the ultimate destiny for all.

In this synthesis, Origen-Carpocrates's belief system illustrates an evolving understanding of Christ’s soul as a model for human potential—a unification of the incarnational theology with the idea of transcending material limitations, free from the exaggerations of those who sought to divide and categorize him into separate, conflicting traditions.

When examining the beliefs about Jesus’s soul through the lenses of Origen and Carpocrates as if they spoke of one and the same figure, a different picture emerges—one not bound by the orthodox-hyperbolic dichotomy imposed by Irenaeus. In this unified portrayal, we find a person who perceived the soul of Jesus as an essential intermediary between the divine and the human, capable of transcending the limitations imposed by the material world.

This figure, let’s call him Origen-Carpocrates, maintained that Jesus possessed a human soul, which, through purity and steadfastness, ascended to a higher understanding of divine mysteries. Much like Origen’s interpretation, this soul was the vessel through which divine wisdom manifested itself within the incarnate Christ. It allowed him to endure human emotions and experiences, bridging the gap between the divine Logos and the material realm. The soul’s journey and enlightenment weren’t simply a theological abstraction; they were practical, demonstrating the soul's potential to rise beyond earthly constraints and encounter the divine directly.

Yet, in this same figure, we also find the boldness that Carpocrates is said to have displayed—the claim that this divine-human realization could be attained by others. Origen-Carpocrates understood that Jesus, through his soul's purity, remembered the divine truths from which it had originated, suggesting that any soul, steadfast and pure, might similarly ascend. This wasn't an act of diminishing Christ but rather an extension of his mission, demonstrating that the pathway to the divine was not exclusive but open to all who could shed the chains of worldly ignorance.

Far from the audacious pride Irenaeus attributes to Carpocrates, this individual advocated for a shared human potential to emulate Christ’s journey. For Origen-Carpocrates, Jesus was the exemplar—not an isolated miracle but the prototype of what humanity could achieve. His teachings thus bridged the orthodoxy of Origen with the transcendental aspirations attributed to Carpocrates, forming a singular vision where the soul's journey to divine wisdom wasn’t limited to one historical figure but was the ultimate destiny for all.

In this synthesis, Origen-Carpocrates's belief system illustrates an evolving understanding of Christ’s soul as a model for human potential—a unification of the incarnational theology with the idea of transcending material limitations, free from the exaggerations of those who sought to divide and categorize him into separate, conflicting traditions.

The difficulty with identifying Carpocrates as Origen is Hegesippus. How could Hegesippus have identified Origen as being already alive in 180 CE or something like that? If the account of Carpocrates was a second rewrite then the problem is overcome. Origen is generally thought to have been born in 185 CE. Irenaeus likely began his rewriting c. 195 CE. A ten year old Origen fits with him being identified as Harpocrates. Epiphanius's story have Origen as a sex slave in the Serapium. Origen as a boy prodigy is well established. All we need to do is assume Irenaeus altered Hegesippus and then used the rewrite extensively in his Adversus Haereses in 195 CE. Not that difficult. Accounts for why Clement and Origen never cite one another despite being contemporaries and "successors" on the chair of Alexandria.