“The shame of it is in both cases the books were forgeries.”
Well, yeah, I suppose so, but knowing that, and understanding, if not accepting as “gospel truth”, that these works reflect the beliefs of The Church at the time, what difference does it make who wrote them?
By the way, I assume you know that both Origen and Tertullian ended up terrible heretics. Bad enough that we quote them on occasion. For a Reformed Christian to do so is quite something given what they ended up preaching.
I know, one day heretics, next day saints and then heretics again. What we are seeing in their histories is towards the end of the second century original thought would not be acceptable. It also coincides with a growing authority structure.
I really don't have a problem with people exploring all kinds of ideas as long as in the end there is clear support within Scripture.
Anyway as almost always it's interesting to get a different perspective.