Origen's Developing Understanding of the Exegete's Task and its 'canonical' Implications

McCarthy, William (Advisor); Barnes, Allen E. (Author); Rousseau, Philip (Other); Walsh, David (Other); Tuite, Patrick (Other); Toom, Tarmo (Other); Bhutani, Kiran (Other)

Degree awarded: Ph.D. Early Christian Studies. The Catholic University of America

658 p.

http://hdl.handle.net/1961/16621

McCarthy, William

Rousseau, Philip; Walsh, David; Tuite, Patrick; Toom, Tarmo; Bhutani, Kiran

Religious history; Classical studies; Bible; Commentaries; Contra Celsum; Inspiration; Origen

2014-06-20T15:48:45Z

2014-06-20T15:48:45Z

2014-01-01T00:00:00Z

2014-06-20T00:00:00Z

The last thirty-five years have seen major realignments in concepts of canon development, in particular as it relates to development in exegesis. While some Christian writings were generally acknowledged as scripture in the second century, the closure of the canon is placed in the fourth and fifth centuries. Origen established a number of concepts necessary for the development of the concept of canon. This dissertation constructs the mental model Origen formulated to support his exegetical use of scripture, examines the technical terminology he utilized, and the way he deploys scripture. The methodology employed is inter-disciplinary, utilizing philological, textual (e.g. papyri) and exegetical issues across Origen's Contra Celsum, commentaries and Hexapla; nine strands of prior Jewish and Christian commentaries; and ten classical commentaries in astronomy and mathematics. Quantitative measures, including statistical analysis, are applied to examine how Origen is using scripture. Quantitative analysis of Origen's use of scripture in both his Contra Celsum and his commentaries reveals several levels of usage. Comparison with prior Jewish and Christian commentaries shows that Origen has turned the commentary tradition from a set of disparate products into a comprehensive genre based on philological study, logical principles and a model of inspiration of scripture. The classical commentaries have numerous technical details in common with Origen's efforts, and there are numerous similarities in issues. Yet the fourth century classical commentaries show ideological differences in terms of purpose and audience, reflecting the differences between the third and fourth centuries. While grounding his technical details in contemporary classical, Jewish and Christian efforts, this study quantitatively establishes Origen's new directions in technical terminology, structural coherence and usage, driven by his model of inspiration of scripture.

Text; Dissertation

Barnes_cua_0043A_10485

The Catholic University of America

2014-06-20