4.10 Conclusion: Irenaeus' Intertextual Reading of Gen 1–3 in Haer. 3
Reading Genesis From Creation To Incarnation "binding all things together" (compingens omnia) in Wisdom.137 The notions of strengthening and binding are economic actions of the Son and the Spirit that progress humanity toward their appointed salvation. This is why Irenaeus considers Gnostics to produce errant aberrations of the text, because they reject the very basic knowledge of God as Creator.
4.10
Conclusion: Irenaeus' Intertextual Reading of Gen 1–3 in Haer. 3
With the close of Haer. 3, Irenaeus has completed the first summary of his own theological system in response to the heretics. The contribution of Gen
1–3 serves to support the activity of God among his creatures from creation to glorification. The use of Gen 1–3, however, is intricately connected to a multitude of other passages that are carefully crafted into varying intertextual relationships through a host of reading strategies. These include narratival arrangement of the creation events in particular or salvation history in general, structural markers that arrange his argument, key terms and concepts unite texts through verbal associations, typological relationships that compare and contrast elements of Gen 1–3 with other figures in subsequent revelation, and finally illustrative application of texts. Irenaeus never offers isolated exegetical treatments of texts, but instead incorporates Gen 1–3 into networks of passages that communicate his theological framework. Below I summarize each of the readings strategies that Irenaeus utilizes in Haer. 3 and the way they contribute to Irenaeus' theological polemic.
First, Irenaeus continues to coordinate texts in a narratival relationship both among the texts of Gen 1–3 and externally with the rest of scripture. Gen
1–3 grounds or initiates the chronological development of the divine economy.
This includes, first of all, framing Gen 1–2 in a single coherent narrative of creation. For example, in Haer. 3.24.2 he conflates brief allusions to Gen 1:26, Gen
2:7, and Gen 1:28 (in that order) to depict the basic narrative of the formation of Adam. Adam was created, received the breath of life, and nurtured by means of creation. Moreover, he also provides more general telescoped summaries of key events within the divine economy. In Haer. 3.3.3 his synopsis of work of God includes allusions to creation, the flood, Abraham, Exodus,
Moses, Law, and Prophets. His allusions to Gen 1:1 and Gen 2:7 transform the verbs into titles for God as the "Maker" of heaven and earth and "Fashioner"
137 Although he is not explicit, the connection of these texts with the creation passages is reminiscent of the use of the hands imagery where the "Word" and the "Wisdom" are active in the formation and ordering of creation.
CHAPTER 4
of humankind. The Maker and Fashioner is the main character administering over the other events of salvation history. He also frames the economy of God into a fourfold dispensation including the Adamic covenant, Noahic covenant, Mosaic Covenant, and New Covenant.138 The fourfold nature of the covenants also correspond to the economy of the Son of God including his work in creation, appearance to the patriarchs, giving the law, and recapitulating all things in himself. The Adamic covenant, in particular, establishes the relationship with God, and corresponds closely to the New Covenant. In this strategy, Irenaeus provides little or no substantive commentary on these texts, but simply arranges them in a narrative framework to depict the continuity of the events of the divine economy under the administration of God. For Irenaeus,
Gen 1–3 sets the stage of the divine drama of salvation, and all the turning points of redemption connect back to what happened in the opening scene.
Second, Irenaeus' intertextual reading of Gen 1–3 uses these passages to order and structure his work. In doing so, these texts can serve as structural markers, that hold together his arguments and, in doing so, communicate the importance of these passages amid his polemical debates. The organizational function of these texts is most evident in a series of chiasms that develop in later portion of the book. The texts of Gen 2:5 and Gen 2:7 frame the chiasm in Haer. 3.18.1 and Haer. 3.18.7, and Gen 2:7 and Gen 3:1–8 contribute to the first part of the chiasm in Haer. 3.19.3 and Haer. 3.20.1. His third chiasm in Haer.
3.23.1–8 is the most developed organizational function of Gen 1–3 and the climax of his recapitulative argument. Gen 3:5 frames this chiasm as a whole, but the intervening sections of the chiasm draw from an array of Genesis texts including: Gen 1:26, Gen 3:7–8, Gen 3:10, Gen 3:13, Gen 3:14, Gen 3:15, Gen 3:16,
Gen 3:17–19, Gen 3:21, and Gen 3:23–24. In addition, Irenaeus uses a host of intertexts to interpret these passages including: Gen 4:7–8, Gen 4:9, Gen 4:11,
Matt 12:29, Matt 25:41, Psalm 90(91):13, Prov 1:7, Luke 10:19, Rom 5:12, 17, Rom 6:2,
10, 1 Cor 15:26, 54–55, Gal 3:16, and Rev 20:2. The whole arrangement completes Irenaeus' theology of recapitulation, and reveals the Christological fulfillment of the prophecy of Gen 3:15. Outside of Epid. 11–16, this is the most developed and coherent reading of the events surrounding Adam's disobedience in Gen 3 in all of Irenaeus' extant work.
Third, a common means of coordinating passages is the use of terms or catchwords that make philological connections between texts. These connections can serve to define terms used in other passages of divine revelation or explain the theological connections between key textual images. In many cases these are explanatory in nature and qualify or define the key terms or themes
138 Haer. 3.11.8.
Reading Genesis From Creation To Incarnation in Gen 1–3. The linking terms are also not necessarily identical words or even cognates, but often more general conceptual correspondence. For example, in Haer. 3.11.5 he links the miracle of the wedding feast at Cana with the creation of flora (Gen 1:11) and water (Gen 1:9). A particularly common linking term is the substance of Adam's flesh or "formation" (plasma) and the related terminology, which connects with the substance of plasma. This is not surprising given his overarching anti-Gnostic polemic. In Haer. 3.18.1, the language of "formation" (plasma) and "human being" (hominem) links Gen 2:7, John 1:14, and Eph 1:10. Similar imagery is located in Haer. 3.18.7, but he adds the allusion to the "virgin soil" (terra rudis) in Gen 2:5, which corresponds to the virgin birth of Christ and their subsequent contrastive acts of disobedience and obedience
(Rom 5:12, 19). In Haer. 3.19.3 he relates Adam's "formation" (plasma) with the lost "sheep" (ouem) of Luke 15:4, and the "earth" (terra) of Eph 4:9. Similarly, in Haer. 3.21.10 he connects Adam's "formation" (plasma) that is drawn from the "untilled earth" (rudi terra) of Gen 2:5 with the Word of God who forms all things (John 1:3) and the Adam-Christ typology of Rom 5:12, 19. Then, in Haer.
3.22.1 Irenaeus describes the "meek" (mites) nature of the flesh that is fashioned from the "earth" (terra, Matt 5:5, Gen 2:7). The three concluding sections of the chiasm in Haer. 3.23.6–8, contain the imagery of "life" (vitae, Gen 2:9,
Rom 6:10), "serpent" (serpentem, Gen 3:15, Psalm 90(91):13, Rev 12:9/20:2), "seed"
(semen, Gen 3:15, Gal 3:16,19), and "to tread upon" (calcare, Gen 3:15, Luke 10:19).
These provide intricate linguistic or verbal connections between Gen 3:15 and the person and work of Christ.
Fourth, there are also general typological connections that unite figures and other specific elements in Gen 1–3 with other persons or events in subsequent revelation. In most cases these connections are crafted through his theological perspective, and often closely related to a particular aspect of the work of Christ. The relationship between these texts is theologically symbiotic in the sense that each person or image supports, extends, or demarcates the interpretation of other persons or images in scripture. In other words, Gen
1–3 interprets other passages and other passages interpret Genesis. As I mentioned above in Haer. 3.11.5, the connections between Gen 1–2 and John 2 are ordered by a perspective that links that identity and work of the Creator with the identity and activity of Christ. A general Adam-Christ typology in Haer.
3.18.1 binds together Gen 2:7 and John 1:14, and these theological connections are supported by Deut 32:4 and Eph 1:10. The same theological perspective harmonizes Gen 2:5 with Rom 5:12,19, where Irenaeus' typological connections extend the logic of Paul's Adam-Christ typology. The "descending" (descendere) and "ascending" (ascendere) imagery in Haer. 3.19.3 binds the incarnation and the ascension though linking Isa 7:11, Luke 15:4–6, and Eph 4:9–10. The object
CHAPTER 4
of salvation in each case is man formed from the dust of the earth (Gen 2:7). In Haer. 3.20.1, Irenaeus follows an Adam-Jonah typology and reads the account of Jonah in light of the events of the Garden alongside Matt 12:39–40 and 1 Cor
1:29. The "sign of Jonah" in Matt 12:39–40 is the controlling text, which serves to coordinate Jonah 1:9, Jonah 2:1–2, and Jonah 3:1, 8–9, with an allusion to the disobedience of Adam and Eve in Gen 3:5–8. In this reading, the "great whale"
(magna ceto) is Satan, who deceives the first couple in the Garden, but Adam, like Jonah, received an unexpected salvation from the captivity of this "whale."
In yet another typological relationship, Irenaeus reads the actions of Eve in correspondence to those of Mary in Haer. 3.22.1. Whereas Eve becomes the cause of death in Gen 3:6, Mary is the cause of salvation and resurrection in Luke 1:38, Heb 5:9, and Eph 4:16/Col 2:19. Finally, the chiasm of Haer. 3.23.1–8 and the closing sections abound with conceptual and theological connections, and there is also a general connection between creation in the image of God.
Fifth, he conflates texts using a method of prosopological interpretation where he identifies the divine persons functioning in Gen 1–3 and other related passages. Often times he will use an echo or allusion from a specific scripture text to identify the person functioning in Gen 1–3. For example, in Haer. 3.21.10 he identifies the Word of God creating all things in John 1:3 as the same person creating Adam in Gen 2:7, thereby conflating the identities of the Logos in both instances. Then, in the closing section of Haer. 3.24.2, he connects the activity of God in creation by reading the "Word" of Psalm 32(33):6 and the "Wisdom" of Prov 8:30 in continuity with Gen 1:26, Gen 1:28, and Gen 2:7. The Word and Wisdom are the hands of God overseeing the creative processes. This type of reading strategy becomes more prominent in Haer. 4–5.
Sixth, Irenaeus also demonstrates an illustrative application of texts, where he uses elements within a passage to exemplify a theological argument. In the case of Gen 1–3, first of all, this frequently takes the form of illustrating the nature of a particular aspect of the creative process or function of a particular person in the narrative. For example, when Irenaeus wants to connect the nature and character of the flesh formed from the dust in Gen 2:7 with Christ's experience in the body, he links the creation texts with a host of illustrative texts including: Matt 4:2, John 4:6, Psalm 68:27(69:26), John 11:35, Luke 22:44,
Matt 26:38, and John 19:34.139 Then in Haer. 3.19.3, Irenaeus cites a collection of passages that depict the resurrection of the flesh formed from the dust in Gen 2:7 including: 1 Cor 15:20, Eph 1:22/Col 1:18, Phil 3:9, 1 Cor 15:23, Col 2:19,
Eph 4:16, John 14:2, Rom 12:4/1 Cor 12:12, 20. All of these passages illustrate the resurrection of the same body formed in Adam. Second, he also uses specific
139 Haer. 3.22.2.
Reading Genesis From Creation To Incarnation images in Gen 1–3 as analogies or visual descriptions of a particular aspect of theology. In a similar way, he can apply a text to individuals or entities in his own context, as a way to illustrate their beliefs or behaviors. In Haer. 3.23.8, for example, he portrays the Gnostics as contemporary manifestations of the serpent, who, like the serpent, attempt to deceive the people of God and lead them into acts of disobedience. Then, in Haer. 3.24.1 he compares the breath of God that is imparted to Adam in Gen 2:7 with the church as the vessel of Matt
12:29 that has received the precious deposit of the Spirit. This kind of reading communicates that Irenaeus is not content with mere objective analysis, but views his own context as a continuation of the divine economy established in creation. The same substance and theology of creation, along with the same enemies that seek to destroy and dismember it are also manifested in his day among his congregation.
From beginning to end all of these reading strategies guide his intertextual reading of Gen 1–3 as he crafts his theological polemic against the Gnostics. For the Bishop of Lyons, the events of creation participate in the broader contours of his theological framework. He constantly mingles Gen 1–3 with other scriptural revelation with a series of reading strategies as he attempts to respond to his theological opponents. The complexities of these strategies continue to develop in Haer. 4–5 as he advances his Christological and anthropological perspectives.