*reconciles transmigration with Christianity*

Why didn't Jesus just demand that anyone who experiences lust be genitally mutilated?

Go back the asshole you crawled out of Zig Forumstard.

Go back.

That part is not literal as it would be God contradicting Himself, the rest is although, in the fifth chapter He issues five commands that have far-reaching implications. I suggest you study it.

Jesus is snapping people out of the delusion that it is their body that causes them to sin by saying if that's the case then cut off your body part. The point is that they realise they are hiding behind the excuse and realise it is caused by the will not the body.

"Was I can't stop masturbating my dick is forcing me to do it" *looking for excuse and absolution to carry on masturbating

Jesus: if your dick is forcing you then cut it off

"Oh… I guess it's not actually my dick making me do it but my will. Guess I better stop then."

Jesus was calling out all the biological determinists, who are rampant in this day and age

Empire (especially under Justinian who insisted on State over Church and strong-armed bishops) is not the "Church". You'll figure that out one way or another.

Origen was right on this, my friends. I don't call him a saint though. But some of his adherents certainly were: Macrina and Gregory of Nyssa especially. Imperial Christianity and the Gnostics were wrong.. the truth is closer in between and where you'll find the saints who bore the greatest fruit.

newadvent.org/fathers/3812.htm

Good summation.

Technically, some of Origen's teachings are heretical, on Origen himself and some of his commentary, they are not considered heretical because what he taught didn't defy anything agreed upon in a council.

However, apparently St. Simon the Simple saw Origen in Hell.

well, at the time he taught it I mean. he was heterodox at worst (during his time), and I'm not an Origen fan at all

Teacher Origen did not believe in these heresies. His works were interpolated even while he was alive. Here, read St. Pamphilus' Apology on Origen, he uses Origen's own writings to show Origen believed in none of this blasphemous stuff. In fact the works in this book, specifically the parts quoting Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of St. John, do not line up with the modern "versions" at all, proving hardcore interpolation: b-ok.cc/book/2518184/6c9b63

Proof?

Source: Babushka who heard it from village elder Anton, the knower of things

"We can decide nothing as to the salvation of Origen, though Baronius says that St. Simeon Salus saw him in hell; still, all is a mystery known to God alone. We know, however, on the authority of Baronius, that his doctrine was condemned by Pope Anastasius and Pope Gelasius, and afterwards by the fifth general council (27)."

St. Alphonsus Maria de Ligouri.

As I said, it's only hearsay, but the vision of Origen in Hell is attributed to St. Simeon Salus, otherwise known as St. Simon the Simple.

If so, then why did the Church condemn his teachings? Did none of these bishops not have access to anything Origen wrote? Or did anyone not speak up and defend Origen?

In any case, Origen was not guilty of heresy during his life anyway.