Editing Origen (section)

===Christology===

Origen writes that Jesus was "the firstborn of all creation [who] assumed a body and a human soul".{{sfn|Greggs|2009|p=61}} He firmly believed that Jesus had a human soul{{sfn|Greggs|2009|p=61}} and abhorred [[docetism]] (the teaching which held that Jesus had come to Earth in spirit form rather than a physical human body).{{sfn|Greggs|2009|p=61}} Origen envisioned Jesus' human nature as the one soul that stayed closest to God and remained perfectly faithful to Him, even when all other souls fell away.{{sfn|Greggs|2009|p=61}}{{sfn|Ehrman|2003|p=155}} At Jesus's incarnation, his soul became fused with the Logos and they "intermingled" to become one.{{sfn|Greggs|2009|pp=61–62}}{{sfn|Ehrman|2003|p=155}} Thus, according to Origen, Christ was both human and divine,{{sfn|Greggs|2009|pp=61–62}}{{sfn|Ehrman|2003|p=155}} but like all human souls, Christ's human nature was existent from the beginning.{{sfn|Greggs|2009|p=62}}{{sfn|Ehrman|2003|p=155}}

Origen was the first to propose the [[ransom theory of atonement]] in its fully developed form,{{sfn|Eddy|Beilby|2008|p=86}} although [[Irenaeus]] had previously proposed a prototypical form of it.{{sfn|Eddy|Beilby|2008|p=86}} According to this theory, [[Crucifixion of Jesus|Christ's death on the cross]] was a ransom to Satan in exchange for humanity's liberation.{{sfn|Eddy|Beilby|2008|p=86}} This theory holds that Satan was tricked by God{{sfn|Eddy|Beilby|2008|p=86}}{{sfn|Plantinga|Thompson|Lundberg|2010}} because Christ was not only free of sin, but also the incarnate Deity, whom Satan lacked the ability to enslave.{{sfn|Plantinga|Thompson|Lundberg|2010}} The theory was later expanded by theologians such as [[Gregory of Nyssa]] and [[Tyrannius Rufinus|Rufinus of Aquileia]].{{sfn|Eddy|Beilby|2008|p=86}} In the eleventh century, [[Anselm of Canterbury]] criticized the ransom theory, along with the associated [[Christus Victor]] theory,{{sfn|Eddy|Beilby|2008|p=86}} resulting in the theory's decline in western Europe.{{sfn|Eddy|Beilby|2008|p=86}} The theory has nonetheless retained some of its popularity in the [[Eastern Orthodox Church]].{{sfn|Eddy|Beilby|2008|p=86}}